To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Report on the
Panhandle
Watershed Planning Region
Oklahoma Water Resources BoardOklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Report on the
Panhandle Watershed Planning RegionStatewide OCWP Watershed Planning Region
and Basin Delineation
Contents
Introduction 1
Regional Overview . 1
Regional Summary 2
Synopsis . 2
Water Resources & Limitations 2
Water Supply Options . 4
Water Supply . 6
Physical Water Availability . 6
Surface Water Resources 6
Groundwater Resources . 9
Permit Availability 11
Water Quality 12
Water Demand . 20
Public Water Providers . 22
OCWP Provider Survey 27
Water Supply Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
Limitations Analysis 30
Primary Options 30
Demand Management 30
Out-of-Basin Supplies . 30
Reservoir Use 30
Increasing Reliance on Surface Water . 31
Increasing Reliance on Groundwater 31
Expanded Options 31
Expanded Conservation Measures . 31
Artificial Aquifer Recharge 31
Marginal Quality Water Sources 31
Potential Reservoir Development 31
Basin Summaries and Data & Analysis . 35
Basin 52 . 35
Basin 53 . 45
Basin 54 . 55
Basin 55 . 65
Basin 65 . 75
Basin 66 . 85
Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94
Panhandle Regional Report 1
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
The Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan (OCWP) was originally developed in 1980 and last updated in 1995. With the specific objective of establishing a reliable supply of water for state users throughout at least the next 50 years, the current update represents the most ambitious and intensive water planning effort ever undertaken by the state. The 2012 OCWP Update is guided by two ultimate goals:
Provide safe and dependable water supply 1. for all Oklahomans while improving the economy and protecting the environment.
Provide information so that water 2. providers, policy makers, and water users can make informed decisions concerning the use and management of Oklahoma’s water resources.
In accordance with the goals, the 2012 OCWP Update has been developed under an innovative parallel-path approach: inclusive and dynamic public participation to build sound water policy complemented by detailed technical evaluations.
Also unique to this update are studies conducted according to specific geographic boundaries (watersheds) rather than political boundaries (counties). This new strategy involved subdividing the state into 82 surface water basins for water supply availability analysis (see the OCWP Physical Water Supply Availability Report). Existing watershed boundaries were revised to include a United States Geological Survey (USGS) stream gage at or near the basin outlet (downstream boundary), where practical. To facilitate consideration of regional supply challenges and potential solutions, basins were aggregated into 13 distinct Watershed Planning Regions.
This Watershed Planning Region Report, one of 13 such documents prepared for the 2012 OCWP Update, presents elements of technical studies pertinent to the Panhandle Region. Each regional report presents information from both a regional and multiple basin perspective, including water supply/demand analysis results, forecasted water supply shortages, potential supply solutions and alternatives, and supporting technical information.
Integral to the development of these reports was the Oklahoma H2O model, a sophisticated database and geographic information system (GIS) based analysis tool created to compare projected water demand to physical supplies in each of the 82 OCWP basins statewide. Recognizing that water planning is not a static process but rather a dynamic one, this versatile tool can be updated over time as new supply and demand data become available, and can be used to evaluate a variety of “what-if” scenarios at the basin level, such as a change in supply sources, demand, new reservoirs, and various other policy management scenarios.
Primary inputs to the model include demand projections for each decade through 2060, founded on widely-accepted methods and
Introduction
The primary factors in the determination of reliable future water supplies are physical supplies, water rights, water quality, and infrastructure. Gaps and depletions occur when demand exceeds supply, and can be attributed to physical supply, water rights, infrastructure, or water quality constraints.
As a key foundation of OCWP technical work, a computer-based analysis tool, “Oklahoma H2O,” was created to compare projected demands with physical supplies for each basin to identify areas of potential water shortages.peer review of inputs and results by state and federal agency staff, industry representatives, and stakeholder groups for each demand sector. Surface water supply data for each of the 82 basins used 58 years of publicly-available daily streamflow gage data collected by the USGS. Groundwater resources were characterized using previously-developed assessments of groundwater aquifer storage and recharge rates.
Additional information gained during the development of the 2012 Update is provided in various OCWP supplemental reports. Assessments of statewide physical water availability and potential shortages are documented in the OCWP Physical Water Supply Availability Report. Statewide water demand projection methods and results are presented in the Water Demand Forecast Report. Permitting availability was evaluated based on the OWRB’s administrative protocol and documented in the Water Supply Permit Availability Report. All supporting documentation can be found on the OWRB’s website.
Regional Overview
The Panhandle Watershed Planning Region includes six basins (numbered 52-55 and 65-66 for reference). The region encompasses 9,426 square miles in northwest Oklahoma, spanning from the Panhandle counties of Cimarron, Texas, and Beaver, and extending to the southeast through all of Harper County and portions of Woods, Woodward, Major, Blaine, Dewey, and Ellis Counties.
The region is in the Great Plains and Central Lowland physiography provinces. Cimarron, Texas, and Beaver Counties in the Panhandle are generally flat while the remainder of the region is characterized by rough terrain marked with high sand hills and deep erosion. The highest elevation in Oklahoma, Black Mesa Plateau, is found in the far northwestern corner of Cimarron County.
The climate is semi-arid in the Panhandle and sub-humid in the remainder of the region, with mean annual temperatures ranging from 54°F in the Panhandle to 60°F in the southeast corner of the region. Precipitation ranges from 16 inches in the west to 28 inches in the southeast. Annual evaporation is significant, ranging from 56 to 64 inches.
The largest cities in the region include Woodward (2010 population of 12,206) and Guymon (11,382). The greatest demand is from Crop Irrigation water use.
By 2060, this region is projected to have a total demand of 473,800 acre-feet per year (AFY), an increase of approximately 83,000 AFY (21%) from 2010.2 Panhandle Regional Report
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Panhandle Regional Summary
The Panhandle Region accounts for 21% of the state’s total water demand. The largest demand sector is Crop Irrigation (86%).
Water Resources & Limitations
Surface Water
Surface water is used to meet about 2% of the region’s demand. Basins throughout the region are projected to have surface water supply shortages in the future. The region is supplied by two rivers: the North Canadian River (known in the Panhandle as the Beaver River) and the Cimarron River. Historically, rivers and creeks in the region have had periods of low to no flow during any month of the year due to seasonal and long-term precipitation trends. Irrigation has had a significant effect on the Beaver River’s streamflow, which has decreased substantially since the 1970s. Large reservoirs have been built on the North Canadian River (Canton and Optima Lakes) and on Wolf Creek (Fort Supply Lake) to provide flood control, recreation, and public water supply. Optima Lake regulates flow in the Beaver River at Beaver but does not sustain a water supply yield.
Relative to other regions, surface water quality in the region is considered fair to good. However, multiple rivers, creeks, and lakes, including the Beaver and Cimarron Rivers, are impaired for Agricultural use (Crop Irrigation demand sector) and Public and Private Water Supply (Municipal and Industrial demand sector) due to high levels of total dissolved solids (TDS), salts, and chlorophyll-a. These impairments are scheduled to be addressed through the Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) process, but the use of these supplies may be limited in the interim.
Surface water in the region is fully allocated, limiting diversions to existing permitted amounts.
Alluvial Groundwater
Alluvial groundwater is used to meet 7% of the demand in the region. The majority of currently allocated alluvial groundwater withdrawals in the region are from the North Canadian River aquifer, and to a lesser extent, the Cimarron River aquifer. If alluvial groundwater continues to supply a similar portion of demand in the future, storage depletions from these aquifers are likely to occur throughout the year, although these projected depletions will be minimal relative to the amount of water in storage and permit availability. The largest storage depletions are projected to occur in the summer.
The availability of water rights is not expected to constrain the use of alluvial groundwater supplies to meet local demands through 2060.
Bedrock Groundwater
Bedrock groundwater is used to meet 91% of the demand in the region. Currently allocated and projected withdrawals are primarily from
Synopsis
The Panhandle Watershed Planning Region relies primarily on bedrock groundwater supplies from the Ogallala aquifer.
It is anticipated that water users in the region will continue to rely on the Ogallala and minor aquifers to meet future demand.
Surface water supplies will be typically insufficient to meet demand throughout the Region.
Groundwater storage depletions may lead to higher pumping costs, the need for deeper wells, and potentially, changes to well yields or water quality.
Additional conservation could reduce surface water gaps, alluvial groundwater storage depletions, and bedrock groundwater storage depletions.
Surface water alternatives, such as groundwater supplies and/or developing new small reservoirs, could eliminate gaps without major impacts to groundwater storage.
Three basins (54, 55, and 66) within the region have been identified as “hot spots,” areas where more pronounced water supply availability issues are forecasted. (See “Regional and Statewide Opportunities and Solutions,” OCWP Executive Report.)
Current and Projected Regional Water Demand
Current Water Demand:
390,690 acre-feet/year (21% of state total)
Largest Demand Sector:
Crop Irrigation (86% of regional total)
Current Supply Sources:
2% SW
7% Alluvial GW
91% Bedrock GW
Projected Demand (2060):
473,840 acre-feet/year
Growth (2010-2060):
83,150 acre-feet/year (21%)
Panhandle Region Demand SummaryPanhandle Regional Report 3
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Supply Limitations
Panhandle Region
the Ogallala aquifer, and to a much lesser extent, the El Reno and other non-delineated minor aquifers. The Ogallala has substantial groundwater storage and commonly yields 500 to 1,000 gpm and can yield up to 2,000 gpm in thick, highly permeable areas. Aquifer storage depletions are likely to occur throughout the year, but will be largest in the summer months.
Water Supply Limitations
Surface water limitations were based on physical availability, water supply availability for new permits, and water quality. Groundwater limitations were based on the total size and rate of storage depletions in major aquifers. Groundwater permits are not expected to constrain the use of groundwater through 2060, and insufficient statewide groundwater quality data are available to compare basins based on groundwater quality. Basins with the most significant water supply challenges statewide are indicated by a red box. The remaining basins with surface water gaps or groundwater storage depletions were considered to have potential limitations (yellow). Basins without gaps and storage depletions were considered to have minimal limitations (green). Detailed explanations of each basin’s supplies are provided in individual basin summaries and supporting data and analysis.These depletions are small relative to the amount of water in storage, but are expected to lead to adverse impacts on pumping costs, yields, and/or water quality.
The availability of water rights is not expected to constrain the use of bedrock groundwater supplies to meet local demand through 2060. 4 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Supply Options
To quantify physical surface water gaps and groundwater storage depletions through 2060, use of local supplies was assumed to continue in the current (2010) proportions. The Ogallala aquifer is expected to continue to supply the majority of demand in the region. The development of groundwater supplies should be considered a short-term water supply option. Over time, the Ogallala may no longer be the most cost-effective source of supply as water levels decrease. Basins and users that rely on surface water are projected to have physical surface water supply shortages (gaps) in the future. Alluvial groundwater storage depletions are also projected in the future. Therefore, additional long-term water supplies should be considered.
Water conservation could aid in reducing projected gaps and groundwater storage depletions or delaying the need for additional infrastructure. Moderately expanded conservation activities, primarily from increased sprinkler irrigation efficiency, could reduce gaps and storage depletions. Further reductions could occur from substantially expanded conservation activities. These measures would require a shift from crops with high water demand (e.g., corn for grain and forage crops) to low water demand crops such as sorghum for grain or wheat for grain, along with increased irrigation efficiency and increased public water supplier conservation. Due to extended dry periods and predominant use of groundwater supplies, drought management measures alone will likely be an ineffective water supply option.
New small reservoirs (50 acre-feet (AF) or less of storage) could enhance the dependability of surface water supplies, but are not expected to substantially decrease gaps. The OCWP Reservoir Viability Study, which evaluated the potential for reservoirs throughout the state, identified two potentially viable sites in the Panhandle Watershed Planning Region.
Alternatively, out-of-basin supplies could provide additional supplies to mitigate the region’s storage depletions. However, due to the distance to dependable supplies, this water supply option may not be cost-effective for many users.
The projected growth in surface water and alluvial groundwater use could instead be supplied by the Ogallala aquifer, which would result in minimal increases in projected groundwater storage depletions. However, increased demands would still leave users susceptible to the adverse effects of storage depletions.
Effectiveness of water supply options in each basin in the Panhandle Region. This evaluation was based upon results of physical water supply availability analysis, existing infrastructure, and other basin-specific factors.
Water Supply Option Effectiveness
Panhandle RegionOklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Panhandle Regional Report 5
6 Panhandle Regional Report
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Supply
Physical Water Availability
Surface Water Resources
Surface water has historically been only a small fraction of the supply used to meet demand in the Panhandle Region. The region’s major streams include the upper North Canadian River (known in part of the region as the Beaver River) and the upper Cimarron River. Many streams in this region are characterized by frequent low-flow periods, although periodic flooding events can also occur.
The headwaters of the upper North Canadian River (Beaver River) are found in Texas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma. The mainstem runs the length of the Oklahoma panhandle turning toward the southeast, where it is known as the Beaver River before reaching the confluence of Wolf Creek. Wolf Creek (approximately 90 miles long, 50 miles in Oklahoma) is the only major tributary to the North Canadian/Beaver River within the Panhandle Region. The upper North Canadian River and its tributaries are located in Basins 52, 53, 54, and 55.
The upper Cimarron River originates in New Mexico and runs along the northern border of Oklahoma, winding in and out of Oklahoma, Colorado, and Kansas. The mainstem turns southeast through Oklahoma in the eastern portion of the Panhandle Region. The Cimarron River’s two largest tributaries within the Panhandle Region are Sand Creek (50 miles long) and Buffalo Creek (50 miles).
As important sources of surface water in Oklahoma, reservoirs and lakes help provide dependable water supply storage, especially when streams and rivers experience periods of low seasonal flow or drought.The Upper Cimarron River and its tributaries are located in Basins 65 and 66.
In the Panhandle Region, streamflow is generally intermittent, but has fair to good quality when available. There are three major reservoirs in the Panhandle Region, but only one provides water supply yield to the region. Canton Lake was constructed on the Upper North Canadian River in 1948 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. However, the entire yield of Canton (13,440 AF/year) is allocated to Oklahoma City. Fort Supply Lake, located on the Wolf Creek tributary to the North Canadian River, was built by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in 1942 and provides a relatively small water supply yield to the region (220 AF/year). Optima Lake, built in
Reservoirs
Panhandle Region
Reservoir Name
Primary Basin Number
Reservoir Owner/Operator
Year Built
Purposes1
Normal Pool Storage
Water Supply
Irrigation
Water Quality
Permitted
Withdrawals
Remaining Water Supply Yield to be Permitted
Storage
Yield
Storage
Yield
Storage
Yield
AF
AF
AFY
AF
AFY
AF
AFY
AFY
AFY
Canton
52
USACE
1948
FC, WS, IR
111,310
38,000
16,240
69,000
2,240
0
0
18,480
0
Fort Supply
54
USACE
1942
FC, C
13,900
400
224
0
0
0
0
0
224
Optima
55
USACE
1978
FC, WS, R, FW
129,000
117,650
---
0
0
0
0
0
No Yield
1 The “Purposes” represent the use(s), as authorized by the funding entity or dam owner(s), for the reservoir storage when constructed.
WS = Water Supply, FC = Flood Control, IR = Irrigation, HP = Hydroelectric Power, WQ = Water Quality, C = Conservation, R = Recreation, FW= Fish & Wildlife, CW = Cooling Water, N = Navigation, LF = Low Flow Regulation
No known information is annotated as “---”1978 and operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, regulates flow in the Beaver River at Beaver, Oklahoma, but does not sustain a dependable water supply yield. There are small privately owned lakes in the region that provide water for agricultural water supply and recreation. Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Panhandle Regional Report 7
Major reservoirs in the Panhandle Region include Canton and Fort Supply. Reservoirs may serve multiple purposes, such as water supply, irrigation, recreation, hydropower generation, and flood control. Reservoirs designed for multiple purposes typically possess a specific volume of water storage assigned for each purpose.
Surface Water Resources
Panhandle Region8 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Estimated Annual Streamflow in 2060
Panhandle Region
Streamflow Statistic
Basins
52
53
54
55
65
66
AFY
Average Annual Flow
93,400
57,500
19,300
12,900
45,500
5,600
Minimum Annual Flow
10,200
500
1,300
0
4,700
0
Annual streamflow in 2060 was estimated using historical gaged flow and projections of increased surface water use from 2010 to 2060.
Water Supply Availability Analysis
For OCWP physical water supply availability analysis, water supplies were divided into three categories: surface water, alluvial aquifers, and bedrock aquifers. Physically available surface water refers to water currently in streams, rivers, lakes, and reservoirs.
The range of historical surface water availability, including droughts, is well-represented in the Oklahoma H2O tool by 58 years of monthly streamflow data (1950 to 2007) recorded by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Therefore, measured streamflow, which reflects current natural and human created conditions (runoff, diversions and use of water, and impoundments and reservoirs), is used to represent the physical water that may be available to meet projected demand.
The estimated average and minimum annual streamflow in 2060 were determined based on historic surface water flow measurements and projected baseline 2060 demand (see Water Demand section). The amount of streamflow in 2060 may vary from basin-level values, due to local variations in demands and local availability of supply sources. The estimated surface water supplies include changes in historical streamflow due to increased upstream demand, return flows, and increases in out-of-basin supplies from existing infrastructure. Permitting, water quality, infrastructure, non-consumptive demand, and potential climate change implications are considered in separate OCWP analyses. Past reservoir operations are reflected and accounted for in the measured historical streamflow downstream of a reservoir. For this analysis, streamflow was adjusted to reflect interstate compact provisions in accordance with existing administrative protocol.
The amount of water a reservoir can provide from storage is referred to as its yield. The yield is considered the maximum amount of water a reservoir can dependably supply during critical drought periods. OCWP physical availability analyses considered the unused yield of existing reservoirs. Future potential reservoir storage was considered as a water supply option.
Groundwater supplies are quantified by the amount of water that the aquifer holds (“stored” water) and the rate of aquifer recharge. In Oklahoma, recharge to aquifers is generally from precipitation that falls on the aquifer and percolates to the water table. In some cases, where the altitude of the water table is below the altitude of the stream-water surface, surface water can seep into the aquifer.
For this analysis, alluvial aquifers are defined as aquifers comprised of river alluvium and terrace deposits, occurring along rivers and streams and consisting of unconsolidated deposits of sand, silt, and clay. Alluvial aquifers are generally thinner (less than 200 feet thick) than bedrock aquifers, feature shallow water tables, and are exposed at the land surface, where precipitation can readily percolate to the water table. Alluvial aquifers are considered to be more hydrologically connected with streams than are bedrock aquifers and are therefore treated separately.
Bedrock aquifers consist of consolidated (solid) or partially consolidated rocks, such as sandstone, limestone, dolomite, and gypsum. Most bedrock aquifers in Oklahoma are exposed at land surface, either entirely or in part. Recharge from precipitation is limited in areas where bedrock aquifers are not exposed.
For both alluvial and bedrock aquifers, this analysis was used to predict potential groundwater depletions based on the difference between the groundwater demand and recharge rate. While potential storage depletions do not affect the permit availability of water, it is important to understand the extent of these depletions.
Surface water supplies only about 2% of the demand in the Panhandle Region. While the region’s average physical surface water supply exceeds projected surface water demand in the region, gaps can occur due to seasonal, long-term hydrologic (drought) or localized variability in surface water flows.
Surface Water Flows (1950-2007)
Panhandle RegionOklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Panhandle Regional Report 9
alluvium and 100 and 500 gpm in the terrace deposits. The terrace deposits are overlain by sand dunes. The water is very hard and is classified as calcium magnesium bicarbonate type. Extensive pumping can make this formation susceptible to salt water intrusion. The aquifer underlies a portion of Basin 65.
The only minor aquifer in the region is the El Reno. Minor aquifers may have a substantial amount of water in storage and high recharge rates, but generally low yields of less than 50 gpm per well. Groundwater from minor aquifers is an important source of water for domestic and stock water use for individuals in outlying areas, but may not provide sufficient water for large volume users.in the terrace formations. The water is a very hard calcium bicarbonate type with TDS concentrations of up to 1,000 mg/L. The aquifer underlies portions of Basins 52, 53, 54, and 65.
The Cimarron River alluvial aquifer tends to be silt and clay deposits changing downward to sandy clay, sand, and fine gravel. Maximum thickness reaches 80 feet with well yields ranging between 100 and 200 gpm in the
Groundwater Resources
The Ogallala aquifer, which underlies all but the northeastern portion and the far northwest corner of the Panhandle Watershed Planning Region, is the single largest source of groundwater in Oklahoma. Three major alluvial aquifers, the Canadian River, Cimarron River, and North Canadian River, are located in the eastern portion of the region.
Regionally, the Ogallala aquifer is part of the High Plains aquifer that underlies 174,000 square miles in eight states in the central United States, including about 7,100 square miles in northwestern Oklahoma. The aquifer underlies portions of Basin 52, 53, 54, 55, 65, and 66, and consists predominantly of semi-consolidated sediment layers. The depth to water ranges from less than 10 feet to more than 300 feet below the land surface, and the saturated thickness ranges from nearly zero to almost 430 feet. The Ogallala commonly yields 500 to 1,000 gpm and can yield up to 2,000 gpm in thick, highly permeable areas. Historically, groundwater has been pumped out of the aquifer at rates significantly exceeding recharge, causing declining water levels throughout much of the aquifer. In small areas of Cimarron and Texas Counties, water levels have declined more than 50 to 100 feet. Elsewhere, local water quality has been impaired by high concentrations of nitrate. However, water quality of the aquifer is generally very good.
The North Canadian River alluvial aquifer consists of fine- to coarse-grained sand with minor clay and silt and local lenses of basal gravel overlain by dune sand. Formation thickness generally averages 30 feet in the alluvium and 70 feet in the terrace deposits. Yields range between 300 and 600 gpm in the alluvium and between 100 and 300 gpm
Withdrawing groundwater in quantities exceeding the amount of recharge to the aquifer may result in reduced aquifer storage. Therefore, both storage and recharge were considered in determining groundwater availability.
Areas without delineated aquifers may have groundwater present. However, specific quantities, yields, and water quality in these areas are currently unknown.
Groundwater Resources
Panhandle Region
Aquifer
Portion of Region Overlaying Aquifer
Recharge
Rate
Current Groundwater Rights
Aquifer Storage in Region
Equal Proportionate Share
Groundwater Available for New Permits
Name
Type
Class1
Percent
Inch/Yr
AFY
AF
AFY/Acre
AFY
Canadian River
Alluvial
Major
<1%
2.0
0
12,000
temporary 2.0
12,800
Cimarron River
Alluvial
Major
1%
2.3
10,800
327,000
temporary 2.0
140,100
El Reno
Bedrock
Minor
8%
0.75
4,700
2,555,000
temporary 2.0
978,700
North Canadian River
Alluvial
Major
8%
1.0
90,600
4,346,000
1.0
413,700
Ogallala
Bedrock
Major
65%
0.5
1,423,800
84,371,000
1.4 to 2.0
6,100,600
Non-Delineated Groundwater Source
Alluvial
Minor
10,500
Non-Delineated Groundwater Source
Bedrock
Minor
4,500
1 Bedrock aquifers with typical yields greater than 50 gpm and alluvial aquifers with typical yields greater than 150 gpm are considered major.
Permits to withdraw groundwater from aquifers (groundwater basins) where the maximum annual yield has not been set are “temporary” permits that allocate 2 AFY/acre. The temporary permit allocation is not based on storage, discharge or recharge amounts, but on a legislative (statute) estimate of maximum needs of most landowners to ensure sufficient availability of groundwater in advance of completed and approved aquifer studies. As a result, the estimated amount of Groundwater Available for New Permits may exceed the estimated aquifer storage amount. For aquifers (groundwater basins) where the maximum annual yield has been determined (with initial storage volumes estimated), updated estimates of amounts in storage were calculated based on actual reported use of groundwater instead of simulated usage from all lands.10 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
The Ogallala is the only major bedrock aquifer in the Panhandle Region. Major alluvial aquifers in the region include Canadian River, Cimarron River, and North Canadian River. Major bedrock aquifers are defined as those that have an average water well yield of at least 50 gpm; major alluvial aquifers are those that yield, on average, at least 150 gpm.
Groundwater Resources
Panhandle RegionPanhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 11
Permit Availability
For the OCWP water availability analysis, “permit availability” pertains to the amount of water that could be made available for withdrawals under permits issued in accordance with Oklahoma water law.
There is no surface water available for new permits in any basin in the Panhandle Region, limiting diversions to existing permitted amounts. For groundwater, the EPS has been set for all of the Ogallala aquifer with the exception of that underlying Roger Mills County, which is located in the West Central Watershed Planning Region. In the Panhandle Region, the Ogallala aquifer’s EPS is set at two acre-feet per year (AFY) per acre in the three Panhandle counties and 1.4 AFY per acre for other counties in the Planning Region overlying the Ogallala. The EPS for the North Canadian River and the Canadian River aquifers is set at one AFY per acre. For the Cimarron River and El Reno aquifers, temporary permits are issued, granting users two AFY of water per acre of land until the OWRB conducts hydrologic investigations and establishes the maximum annual yield of the basins. Projections indicate that there will be groundwater available for new permits in all aquifers in the Panhandle Region through 2060.
If water authorized by a stream water right is not put to beneficial use within the specified time, the OWRB may reduce or cancel the unused amount and return the water to the public domain for appropriation to others.
Surface Water Permit Availability
Panhandle Region
Projections indicate that there will be no surface water available for new permits through 2060 in all basins in the Panhandle Region.
Groundwater Permit Availability
Panhandle Region
Projections indicate that there will be groundwater available for new permits through 2060 in all basins in the Panhandle Region.
Water Use Permitting in Oklahoma
Oklahoma stream water laws are based on riparian and prior appropriation doctrines. Riparian rights to a reasonable use of water, in addition to domestic use, are not subject to permitting or oversight by the OWRB. An appropriative right to stream water is based on the prior appropriation doctrine, which is often described as “first in time, first in right.” If a water shortage occurs, the diverter with the older appropriative water right will have first right among other appropriative right holders to divert the available water up to the authorized amount.
The permit availability of surface water is based on the average annual flow in the basin, the amount of water that flows past the proposed diversion point, and existing water uses upstream and downstream in the basin. The permit availability of surface water at the outlet of each basin in the region was estimated through OCWP technical analyses. The current allocated use for each basin is also noted to give an indication of the portion of the average annual streamflow used by existing water right holders. A site-specific analysis is conducted before issuing a permit.
Groundwater permit availability is generally based on the amount of land owned or leased that overlies a specific aquifer (groundwater basin). State law provides for the OWRB to conduct hydrologic investigations of groundwater basins and to determine amounts of water that may be withdrawn. After a hydrologic investigation has been conducted on a groundwater basin, the OWRB determines the maximum annual yield of the basin. Based on the “equal proportionate share”—defined as the portion of the maximum annual yield of water from a groundwater basin that is allocated to each acre of land overlying the basin—regular permits are issued to holders of existing temporary permits and to new permit applicants. Equal proportionate shares have yet to be determined on many aquifers in the state. For those aquifers, “temporary” permits are granted to users allocating two acre-feet of water per acre of land per year. Temporary permits are for one-year terms, which can be revalidated by the permittee each year, subject to conditions prescribed in OWRB rules or in an individual case by the OWRB. When the equal proportionate share and maximum annual yield are approved by the OWRB, all temporary permits overlying the studied basin are converted to regular permits at the new approved allocation rate. As with stream water, a groundwater permit grants only the right to withdraw water; it does not ensure yield.12 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Quality
Water quality of the Panhandle Watershed Planning Region is markedly different across two major river systems, the Cimarron and the Beaver/North Canadian. Although some differences are ecologically based, others are due to irrigation and other agricultural uses. From east to west, the region is contained within three distinct plains ecoregions. The terminus of the region is geographically not in Oklahoma’s Panhandle but encompasses the far northwestern corner of the state. The eastern two-thirds of this portion of the region are part of the Central Great Plains ecoregion. To the west, the region transitions into the Southwestern Tablelands ecoregion. A portion of the ecoregion also covers the far northwestern tip of the Panhandle. Finally, the remainder of the region is covered by the High Plains ecoregion, portions of which are intermixed with the Southwestern Tablelands.
Water quality of the Central Great Plains is exemplified by sites along the Beaver/North Canadian River at Fort Supply, Woodward, and Seiling, as well as the Cimarron River near Buffalo. The North Canadian River also drains into Canton Reservoir, at the east end of the region. Nutrient concentrations are typical mean phosphorus concentrations ranging from 0.05 parts per million (ppm) along the Beaver River to 0.12 ppm on the North Canadian near Woodward. From the middle to lower end, as well as at Canton Reservoir, waters are considered eutrophic, but are mesotrophic along the Beaver River. Waters are phosphorus-limited. Water clarity is high in both the Cimarron and Beaver Rivers with average turbidity values ranging from 5 to 10 nephelometric turbidity units (NTUs). Clarity diminishes in the North Canadian River as turbidity averages increase to 15-25 NTU, but is still relatively low for the ecoregion. Clarity is considered good to fair in Canton with an average Secchi depth of 1.2 feet. The most divergent water quality indicator is conductivity. Along the Beaver/North Canadian Rivers and into Canton Reservoir, moderately to highly saline water is present, much like the rest of the Central Great Plains. Median conductivity values range from 1400-1570 microsiemens (μS). However, along the Cimarron River and tributaries, median conductivity values increase to more than 14,000 μS, and from Freedom to Waynoka are more than 150,000 μS. Freshwater ecological diversity is relatively diverse throughout the Beaver/North Canadian River watersheds and highly diverse in the Gypsum Hills and other areas with higher gradients and gravel/cobble substrates. However, due to high salinity, the majority of the upper Cimarron River has relatively low aquatic diversity with fewer than 8-10 fish species. The extremely highly saline areas of the watershed have only two species of fish.
The Panhandle Region is comprised of several distinct ecoregions, as evidenced by its diverse geology and water quality, which ranges from excellent to poor.
Ecoregions
Panhandle Region
Lake Trophic Status
A lake’s trophic state, essentially a measure of its biological productivity, is a major determinant of water quality.
Oligotrophic: Low primary productivity and/or low nutrient levels.
Mesotrophic: Moderate primary productivity with moderate nutrient levels.
Eutrophic: High primary productivity and nutrient rich.
Hypereutrophic: Excessive primary productivity and excessive nutrients.Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 13
The Southwestern Tablelands ecoregion is underlain by the Ogallala Aquifer. The area has numerous springs and has historically supported a variety of ecosystems in lowland areas. Extensive irrigation, however, has diminished groundwater levels somewhat with a distinctive effect on streams and springs. Many perennial streams are ephemeral, including considerable stretches of the Cimarron and Beaver Rivers.
Water quality can be characterized by the Cimarron River to the north, Beaver River through the central part of the ecoregion, and Wolf Creek near Fort Supply and Fort Supply Reservoir. The Beaver River and Wolf Creek have comparatively low nutrient concentrations with phosphorus values ranging from 0.05 to 0.06 ppm, and could be classified as mesotrophic. Total nitrogen concentrations range from 0.15 ppm along the Beaver River to near 0.64 ppm on Wolf Creek. Conversely, the Cimarron River has moderately high nutrient concentrations with total phosphorus and nitrogen averages greater than 0.50 and 1.43 ppm, respectively, and is considered hypereutrophic. Fort Supply Reservoir is co-limited for total phosphorus and nitrogen and is considered eutrophic. Water clarity is good throughout the area with turbidity averages from 11 NTU at Beaver to 21 NTU at Mocane. Fort Supply Reservoir has an average Secchi depth of 25 cm. However, as with the Central Great Plains, salinity is widely variable throughout the ecoregion. On the Beaver River near Guymon, average conductivity is less than 500 μS, which is extremely low for the western plains. Similar conductivity values have been recorded along other spring-fed reaches of the Southwestern Tablelands. Wolf Creek and Fort Supply Reservoir have average conductivity values ranging from 930-1000 μS. Conversely, at the Beaver station, average conductivity is
Water Quality Standards and Implementation
The Oklahoma Water Quality Standards (OWQS) are the cornerstone of the state’s water quality management programs. They are a set of rules promulgated under the federal Clean Water Act and state statutes to maintain and protect the quality of state waters. The OWQS designate beneficial uses for streams, lakes and other bodies of surface water, and for groundwater that has a mean concentration of Total Dissolved Solids of 10,000 milligrams per liter or less. Beneficial uses are the activities for which a waterbody can be used based on physical, chemical, and biological characteristics as well as geographic setting, scenic quality, and economic considerations. Beneficial uses include such categories as Fish and Wildlife Propagation, Public and Private Water Supply, Primary (or Secondary) Body Contact Recreation, Agriculture, and Aesthetics. The OWQS also contain standards for maintaining and protecting these uses. The purpose of the OWQS is to promote and protect as many beneficial uses as are attainable and to assure that degradation of existing quality of waters of the state does not occur.
The OWQS are applicable to all activities which may affect the water quality of waters of the state, and are to be utilized by all state environmental agencies in implementing their programs to protect water quality. Some examples of these implementation programs are: permits for point source (e.g. municipal and industrial) discharges into waters of the state; authorizations for waste disposal from concentrated animal feeding operations; regulation of runoff from nonpoint sources; and corrective actions to clean up polluted waters.
BUMP monitoring sites and streams with TMDL studies completed or underway.
Water Quality Standards Implementation
Panhandle Region14 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Quality Impairments
A waterbody is considered to be impaired when its quality does not meet the standards prescribed for its beneficial uses. For example, impairment of the Public and Private Water Supply beneficial use means the use of the waterbody as a drinking water supply is hindered. Impairment of the Agricultural use means the use of the waterbody for livestock watering, irrigation or other agricultural uses is hindered. Impairments can exist for other uses such as Fish and Wildlife Propagation or Recreation.
The Beneficial Use Monitoring Program (BUMP), established in 1998 to document and quantify impairments of assigned beneficial uses of the state’s lakes and streams, provides information for supporting and updating the OWQS and prioritizing pollution control programs. A set of rules known as “use support assessment protocols” is also used to determine whether beneficial uses of waterbodies are being supported.
In an individual waterbody, after impairments have been identified, a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) study is conducted to establish the sources of impairments—whether from point sources (discharges) or non-point sources (runoff). The study will then determine the amount of reduction necessary to meet the applicable water quality standards in that waterbody and allocate loads among the various contributors of pollution.
For more detailed review of the state’s water quality conditions, see the most recent versions of the OWRB’s BUMP Report, and the Oklahoma Integrated Water Quality Assessment Report, a comprehensive assessment of water quality in Oklahoma’s streams and lakes required by the federal Clean Water Act and developed by the ODEQ.
Water Quality Impairments
Panhandle Region
Regional water quality impairments based on the 2008 Integrated Water Quality Assessment Report. Surface water impairments in this region have occurred due to alterations of stream flow.Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 15
8100 μS, which is extremely saline and more characteristic of the Cimarron River. The Mocane site is also highly saline with an average conductivity of 4300 μS.
The northwestern tip of the Panhandle is encompassed by the diverse Mesa de Maya/Black Mesa ecoregion. Many streams are spring-fed and ephemeral and the Cimarron River is of much higher quality in this area. Although many streams have good water clarity, Lake Carl Etling is fair with an average Secchi depth of 0.75 feet. Nutrient values are relatively high in the lake with total phosphorus ranging from 0.12 to 0.29 ppm and total nitrogen from 2.31 to 4.51 ppm. It is also considered hyper-eutrophic. Conductivity is relatively high at an average of 2,000 μS, and closely resembles the upper portion of the North Canadian River.
The High Plains ecoregion in the OCWP Panhandle Region is mostly comprised of the Canadian/Cimarron High Plains, but is bordered on the northern and western edges by the Rolling Sand Plains and Moderate Relief Plains. Many streams and rivers are naturally ephemeral and little is known about surface water quality. Streams that may have been naturally perennial have become ephemeral as irrigation practices have exacerbated natural precipitation/evaporation issues. Also, many streams are shallow with low banks and very little native habitat for fish. The area does contain numerous playa lakes, which support native wetlands for waterfowl.
Although a statewide groundwater water quality program does not exist in Oklahoma, various aquifer studies have been completed and data are available from municipal and other sources. The Panhandle Region is underlain by the Ogallala aquifer. Most groundwater is used to irrigate crops, with the remainder used for livestock, municipal, and domestic needs. Water quality of the aquifer is generally very good. In some local areas, quality has been impaired by high concentrations of nitrate. Some deep portions of the aquifer have elevated concentrations of calcium, chloride, sodium, and sulfate, derived from upward movement of mineralized water from underlying Permian formations. Water from the Panhandle portion of the Ogallala is of a calcium-magnesium chloride-sulfate type and, although hard, is suitable for public supply. Excessive concentrations of chloride, sulfate and fluoride do make the water unsuitable in some areas. The Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) has identified a local well field with elevated nitrate levels; additional wells showed elevated levels of selenium, probably of natural origin.
The Panhandle region is also underlain by several alluvial aquifers and terrace deposits. In northwest Oklahoma, water quality in alluvium and terrace deposits is affected by adjacent streams. The quality is generally poor where the deposits directly overlie the Ogallala and are not in contact with Permian red beds.
Surface Waters with Designated Beneficial Use
for Public/Private Water Supply
Panhandle Region
Surface Waters with Designated Beneficial Use for Agriculture
Panhandle Region16 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Surface Water Protection
The Oklahoma Water Quality Standards (OWQS) provide protection for surface waters in many ways.
Appendix B Areas are designated in the OWQS as containing waters of recreational and/or ecological significance. Discharges to waterbodies may be limited in these areas.
Source Water Protection Areas are derived from the state’s Source Water Protection Program, which analyzes existing and potential threats to the quality of public drinking water in Oklahoma.
The High Quality Waters designation in the OWQS refers to waters that exhibit water quality exceeding levels necessary to support the propagation of fishes, shellfishes, wildlife, and recreation in and on the water. This designation prohibits any new point source discharges or additional load or increased concentration of specified pollutants.
The Sensitive Water Supplies (SWS) designation applies to public and private water supplies possessing conditions making them more susceptible to pollution events, thus requiring additional protection. This designation restricts point source discharges in the watershed and institutes a 10 μg/L (micrograms per liter) chlorophyll-a criterion to protect against taste and odor problems and reduce water treatment costs.
Outstanding Resource Waters are those constituting outstanding resources or of exceptional recreational and/or ecological significance. This designation prohibits any new point source discharges or additional load or increased concentration of specified pollutants.
Waters designated as Scenic Rivers in Appendix A of the OWQS are protected through restrictions on point source discharges in the watershed. A 0.037 mg/L total phosphorus criterion is applied to all Scenic Rivers in Oklahoma.
Nutrient Limited Watersheds are those containing a waterbody with a designated beneficial use that is adversely affected by excess nutrients.
Surface Water Protection Areas
Panhandle Region
Special OWQS provisions in place to protect surface waters. The watersheds of Lake Carl Etling and Ft. Supply have been identified by OWRB as Nutrient Limited Watersheds but currently lack protection to prevent degradation.Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 17
Groundwater Protection
The Oklahoma Water Quality Standards (OWQS) sets the criteria for protection of groundwater quality as follows:
“If the concentration found in the test sample exceeds [detection limit], or if other substances in the groundwater are found in concentrations greater than those found in background conditions, that groundwater shall be deemed to be polluted and corrective action may be required.”
Wellhead Protection Areas are established by the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) to improve drinking water quality through the protection of groundwater supplies. The primary goal is to minimize the risk of pollution by limiting potential pollution-related activities on land around public water supplies.
Oil and Gas Production Special Requirement Areas, enacted to protect groundwater and/or surface water, can consist of specially lined drilling mud pits (to prevent leaks and spills) or tanks whose contents are removed upon completion of drilling activities; well set-back distances from streams and lakes; restrictions on fluids and chemicals; or other related protective measures.
Nutrient-Vulnerable Groundwater is a designation given to certain hydrogeologic basins that are designated by the OWRB as having high or very high vulnerability to contamination from surface sources of pollution. This designation can impact land application of manure for regulated agriculture facilities.
Appendix H Limited Areas of Groundwater are localized areas where quality is unsuitable for default beneficial uses due to natural conditions or irreversible human-induced pollution.
NOTE: Although the State of Oklahoma has a mature and successful surface water quality monitoring program, no comprehensive approach or plan to monitor the quality of the state’s groundwater resources has been developed.
Various types of protection are in place to prevent degradation of groundwater and levels of vulnerability. The North Canadian and Cimarron alluvial aquifers have been identified by the OWRB as very highly vulnerable but currently lack protection to prevent degradation.
Groundwater Protection Areas
Panhandle Region18 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Quality Trends Study
As part of the 2012 OCWP Update, OWRB monitoring staff compiled more than ten years of Beneficial Use Monitoring Program (BUMP) data and other resources to initiate an ongoing statewide comprehensive analysis of surface water quality trends. Five parameters were selected for OCWP watershed planning region analysis—chlorophyll-a, conductivity, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and turbidity.
Reservoir Trends: Water quality trends for reservoirs were analyzed for chlorophyll-a, conductivity, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and turbidity at sixty-five (65) reservoirs across the state. Data sets were of various lengths, depending on the station’s period of record. The direction and magnitude of trends varies throughout the state and within regions. However, when considered statewide, the final trend analysis revealed several notable details.
Chlorophyll-a and nutrient concentrations continue to increase at a number • of lakes. The proportions of lakes exhibiting a significant upward trend were 42% for chlorophyll-a, 45% for total nitrogen, and 12% for total phosphorus.
Likewise, conductivity and turbidity have trended upward over time. Nearly • 28% of lakes show a significant upward trend in turbidity, while nearly 45% demonstrate a significant upward trend for conductivity.
Stream Trends: Water quality trends for streams were analyzed for conductivity, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and turbidity at sixty (60) river stations across the state. Data sets were of various lengths, depending on the station’s period of record, but generally, data were divided into historical and recent datasets, and analyzed separately and as a whole. The direction and magnitude of trends varies throughout the state and within regions. However, when considered statewide, the final trend analysis revealed several notable details.
Total nitrogen and phosphorus are very different when comparing period of • record to more recent data. When considering the entire period of record, approximately 80% of stations showed a downward trend in nutrients. However, if only the most recent data (approximately 10 years) are considered, the percentage of stations with a downward trend decreases to 13% for nitrogen and 30% for phosphorus. The drop is accounted for in stations with either significant upward trends or no detectable trend.
Likewise, general turbidity trends have changed over time. Over the entire • period of record, approximately 60% of stations demonstrated a significant upward trend. However, more recently, that proportion has dropped to less than 10%.
Similarly, general conductivity trends have changed over time, albeit less • dramatically. Over the entire period of record, approximately 45% of stations demonstrated a significant upward trend. However, more recently, that proportion has dropped to less than 30%.
Typical Impact of Trends Study Parameters
Chlorophyll-a is a measure of algae growth. When algae growth increases, there is an increased likelihood of taste and odor problems in drinking water as well as aesthetic issues.
Conductivity is a measure of the ability of water to pass electrical current. In water, conductivity is affected by the presence of inorganic dissolved solids, such as chloride, nitrate, sulfate, and phosphate anions (ions that carry a negative charge) or sodium, magnesium, calcium, iron, and aluminum cations (ions that carry a positive charge). Conductivity in streams and rivers is heavily dependent upon regional geology and discharges. High specific conductance indicates high concentrations of dissolved solids, which can affect the suitability of water for domestic, industrial, agricultural and other uses. At higher conductivity levels, drinking water may have an unpleasant taste or odor or may even cause gastrointestinal distress. High concentration may also cause deterioration of plumbing fixtures and appliances. Relatively expensive water treatment processes, such as reverse osmosis, are required to remove excessive dissolved solids from water. Concerning agriculture, most crops cannot survive if the salinity of the water is too high.
Total Nitrogen is a measure of all dissolved and suspended nitrogen in a water sample. It includes kjeldahl nitrogen (ammonia + organic), nitrate and nitrite nitrogen. It is naturally abundant in the environment and is a key element necessary for growth of plants and animals. Excess nitrogen from polluting sources can lead to significant water quality problems, including harmful algal blooms, hypoxia and declines in wildlife and its habitat.
Phosphorus is one of the key elements necessary for growth of plants and animals. Excess nitrogen and phosphorus lead to significant water quality problems, including harmful algal blooms, hypoxia, and declines in wildlife and its habitat. Increases in total phosphorus can lead to excessive growth of algae, which can increase taste and odor problems in drinking water as well as increased costs for treatment.
Turbidity refers to the clarity of water. The greater the amount of total suspended solids (TSS) in the water, the murkier it appears and the higher the measured turbidity. Increases in turbidity can increase treatment costs and have negative effects on aquatic communities by reducing light penetration.Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 19
Stream Water Quality Trends
Panhandle Region
Site
Beaver River
near Beaver
Cimarron River
near Buffalo
Cimarron River
near Mocane
North Canadian River near Seiling
North Canadian River near Woodward
Parameter
All Data Trend
(1961-1994, 1998-2009)1
Recent Trend (1998-2009)
All Data Trend
(1968-1994, 1998-2009)1
Recent Trend (1998-2009)
All Data Trend (1999-2009)1
Recent Trend (1999-2009)
All Data Trend
(1967-1993, 1998-2009)1
Recent Trend (1998-2009)
All Data Trend
(1960-1995, 1998-2009)1
Recent Trend (2000-2009)
Conductivity (μS/cm)
Total Nitrogen (mg/L)
NT
NT
NT
Total Phosphorus (mg/L)
NT
NT
NT
Turbidity (NTU)
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
Increasing Trend Decreasing Trend NT = No significant trend detectedTrend magnitude and statistical confidence levels vary for each site. Site-specific information can be obtained from the OWRB Water Quality Division.
1 Date ranges for analyzed data represent the earliest site visit date for at least one parameter yet may not be inclusive of all parameters.
Notable concerns in the Panhandle Region are:
Significant upward trend for conductivity on the Beaver and Cimarron Rivers•
Significant upward trend for total nitrogen throughout region•
Lake Water Quality Trends
Panhandle Region
Site
Canton Lake
Parameter
(1995-2009)
Chlorophyll-a (mg/m3)
Conductivity (μS/cm)
NT
Total Nitrogen (mg/L)
Total Phosphorus (mg/L)
NT
Turbidity (NTU)
Increasing Trend Decreasing Trend NT = No significant trend detectedTrend magnitude and statistical confidence levels vary for each site. Site-specific information can be obtained from the OWRB Water Quality Division.
A notable concern in the Panhandle Region is:
Significant upward trend for total nitrogen and turbidity at Canton Reservoir• 20 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Demand
The Panhandle Region’s water needs account for about 21% of the total statewide demand. Regional demand will increase by 21% (83,000 AFY) from 2010 to 2060. The majority of the demand and growth in demand over this period will be in the Crop Irrigation sector.
Crop Irrigation is expected to remain the largest demand sector in the region, accounting for 82% of the total regional demand in 2060. Currently, 6% of the demand from this sector is supplied by surface water, 19% by alluvial groundwater, and 75% by bedrock groundwater. Predominant irrigated crops in the Panhandle Region include corn, pasture grasses, and wheat.
Self Supplied Industrial demand is projected to account for approximately 5% of the 2060 demand. Currently, 33% of the demand from this sector is supplied by alluvial groundwater and 67% by bedrock groundwater.
Municipal and Industrial demand in the Panhandle Region is projected to account for approximately 4% of the 2060 demand. Currently, 5% of the demand from this sector is supplied by surface water, 24% by alluvial groundwater, and 71% by bedrock groundwater.
Livestock demand is projected to account for 4% of the 2060 demand. Currently, 2% of the demand from this sector is supplied by surface water, 10% by alluvial groundwater, and 88% by bedrock groundwater. Livestock use in the region is predominantly for beef cow and hog production. However, beef production is projected to drive the increases in livestock water demand.
Oil and Gas demand is projected to account for approximately 3% of the 2060 demand. Currently, 32% of the demand from this sector is supplied by surface water, 7% by alluvial groundwater, and 61% by bedrock groundwater.
Self Supplied Residential demand is projected to account for approximately 1% of the 2060 demand. Currently, 37% of the demand from this sector is supplied by alluvial groundwater and 63% by bedrock groundwater.
Thermoelectric Power demand is projected to account for less than 1% of the 2060 demand. The Western Farmers Electric Coop, which is supplied by alluvial groundwater, is a large user of water for thermoelectric power generation in Basin 52.
Total 2060 Water Demand by Sector and Basin
(Percent of Total Basin Demand)
Panhandle Region
Projected water demand by sector. Crop Irrigation is expected to remain the largest demand sector in the region, accounting for 82% of the total regional demand in 2060.
Population and demand projection data developed specifically for OCWP analyses focus on retail customers for whom the system provides direct service. These estimates were generated from Oklahoma Department of Commerce population projections. In addition, the 2008 OCWP Provider Survey contributed critical information on water production and population serviced that was used to calculate per capita water use. Population for 2010 was estimated and may not reflect actual 2010 Census values. Exceptions to this methodology are noted.Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 21
Supply Sources Used to Meet
Current Demand (2010)
Panhandle Region
The Panhandle Region’s water needs account for about 21% of the total statewide demand. Regional demand will increase by 21% (83,150 AFY) from 2010 to 2060. The majority of the demand and growth in demand over this period will be in the Crop Irrigation sector.
Total Water Demand
by Sector
Panhandle Region
Water Demand
Water demand refers to the amount of water required to meet the needs of people, communities, industry, agriculture, and other users. Growth in water demand frequently corresponds to growth in population, agriculture, industry, or related economic activity. Demands have been projected from 2010 to 2060 in ten-year increments for seven distinct consumptive water demand sectors.
Water Demand Sectors
nThermoelectric Power: Thermoelectric power producing plants, using both self-supplied water and municipal-supplied water, are included in the thermoelectric power sector.
n Self Supplied Residential: Households on private wells that are not connected to a public water supply system are included in the SSR sector.
n Self Supplied Industrial: Demands from large industries that do not directly depend upon a public water supply system. Water use data and employment counts were included in this sector, when available.
n Oil and Gas: Oil and gas drilling and exploration activities, excluding water used at oil and gas refineries (typically categorized as Self-Supplied Industrial users), are included in the oil and gas sector.
n Municipal and Industrial: These demands represent water that is provided by public water systems to homes, businesses, and industries throughout Oklahoma, excluding water supplied to thermoelectric power plants.
n Livestock: Livestock demands were evaluated by livestock group (beef, poultry, etc.) based on the 2007 Agriculture Census.
n Crop Irrigation: Water demands for crop irrigation were estimated using the 2007 Agriculture Census data for irrigated acres by crop type and county. Crop irrigation requirements were obtained primarily from the Natural Resource Conservation Service Irrigation Guide Reports.
OCWP demands were not projected for non-consumptive or instream water uses, such as hydroelectric power generation, fish and wildlife, recreation and instream flow maintenance. Projections, which were augmented through user/stakeholder input, are based on standard methods using data specific to each sector and OCWP planning basin.
Projections were initially developed for each county in the state, then allocated to each of the 82 basins. To provide regional context, demands were aggregated by Watershed Planning Region. Water shortages were calculated at the basin level to more accurately determine areas where shortages may occur. Therefore, gaps, depletions, and options are presented in detail in the Basin Summaries and subsequent sections. Future demand projections were developed independent of available supply, water quality, or infrastructure considerations. The impacts of climate change, increased water use efficiency, conservation, and non-consumptive uses, such as hydropower, are presented in supplemental OCWP reports.
Present and future demands were applied to supply source categories to facilitate an evaluation of potential surface water gaps and alluvial and bedrock aquifer storage depletions at the basin level. For this baseline analysis, the proportion of each supply source used to meet future demands for each sector was held constant at the proportion established through current, active water use permit allocations. For example, if the crop irrigation sector in a basin currently uses 80% bedrock groundwater, then 80% of the projected future crop irrigation demand is assumed to use bedrock groundwater. Existing out-of-basin supplies are represented as surface water supplies in the receiving basin.
Total Water Demand by Sector
Panhandle Region
Planning Horizon
Crop Irrigation
Livestock
Municipal & Industrial
Oil & Gas
Self Supplied Industrial
Self Supplied Residential
Thermoelectric Power
Total
AFY
2010
336,890
19,010
14,050
3,350
14,470
2,390
530
390,690
2020
347,680
19,220
15,180
5,150
14,490
2,540
590
404,860
2030
358,480
19,430
16,330
7,370
16,280
2,670
660
421,220
2040
369,270
19,640
17,390
10,020
18,400
2,780
740
438,250
2050
377,550
19,860
18,540
13,090
20,600
2,910
820
453,370
2060
390,860
20,070
19,630
16,580
22,740
3,030
920
473,84022 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Public Water Providers
Public Water Providers
Panhandle Region
There are more than 1,600 Oklahoma water systems permitted or regulated by the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ); 785 systems were analyzed in detail for the 2012 OCWP Update. The public systems selected for inclusion, which collectively supply approximately 94 percent of the state’s current population, consist of municipal or community water systems and rural water districts that were readily identifiable as non-profit, local governmental entities. This and other information provided in the OCWP will support provider-level planning by providing insight into future supply and infrastructure needs.
The Panhandle Region includes 32 of the 785 public supply systems analyzed for the 2012 OCWP Update. The Public Water Providers map indicates the approximate service areas of these systems. (The map may not accurately represent existing service areas or legal boundaries. In addition, water systems often serve multiple counties and can extend into multiple planning basins and regions.)
In terms of 2010 population served (excluding provider-to-provider sales), the five largest systems in the region, in decreasing order, are Woodward, Guymon, Hooker, Beaver, and Goodwell. These five systems provide service for more than 70 percent of the population served by public water providers in the region.
Demands upon public water systems, which comprise the majority of the OCWP’s Municipal and Industrial (M&I) water demand sector, were analyzed at both the basin and provider level. Retail demand projections detailed in the Public Water Provider Demand Forecast table were developed for each of the OCWP providers in the region. These projections include estimated system losses, defined as water lost either during water production or distribution to residential homes and businesses. Retail demands do not include wholesaled water.
OCWP provider demand forecasts are not intended to supersede water demand forecasts developed by individual providers. OCWP analyses were made using a consistent methodology based on accepted data available on a statewide basis. Where available, provider-generated forecasts were also reviewed as part of this effort.Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 23
Public Water Providers/Retail Population Served
Panhandle Region
Provider
SDWIS ID1
County
Retail Per Capita (GPD)2
Projected Population Served
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
BEAVER
OK2000404
Beaver
252
1,593
1,623
1,654
1,684
1,704
1,734
BEAVER CO RWD #1 TURPIN
OK2000402
Beaver
147
480
488
496
503
511
519
BEAVER CO RWD #2 (GATE)
OK2000405
Beaver
140
100
100
109
109
109
118
BOISE CITY PWA
OK2001303
Cimarron
339
1,239
1,313
1,354
1,354
1,395
1,428
BUFFALO
OK2003003
Harper
188
1,182
1,182
1,182
1,182
1,212
1,212
DEWEY CO RWD #3
OK2007707
Woodward
88
693
722
744
759
776
790
FARGO
OK2002303
Ellis
147
294
294
294
284
284
294
FORGAN
OK2000406
Beaver
80
496
496
505
514
523
532
FORT SUPPLY PWA
OK3007701
Woodward
322
334
344
363
373
383
383
FREEDOM
OK3007601
Woods
74
271
271
281
281
291
291
GAGE
OK2002301
Ellis
186
423
412
412
402
402
412
GOODWELL
OK2007005
Texas
125
1,287
1,601
1,914
2,228
2,549
2,863
GUYMON
OK2007003
Texas
391
14,531
18,063
21,659
25,254
28,839
32,382
HARDESTY UTILITIES
OK2007004
Texas
162
243
304
365
426
486
547
HARPER CO WATER CORP
OK2003001
Harper
280
201
201
201
201
206
206
HOOKER
OK2007006
Texas
278
1,939
2,412
2,892
3,373
3,854
4,326
KEYES UTILITY AUTH
OK2001302
Cimarron
286
315
330
345
345
353
368
LAVERNE
OK2003002
Harper
381
1,081
1,081
1,081
1,081
1,112
1,112
MOORELAND
OK2007709
Woodward
244
1,242
1,300
1,340
1,369
1,398
1,428
OPTIMA
OK2007001
Texas
53
403
495
598
702
794
897
QUINLAN COMMUNITY RWD #1
OK2007708
Woodward
278
188
196
202
206
211
215
SEILING
OK2002205
Dewey
186
875
854
854
854
875
896
SHARON UTILITIES
OK2007741
Woodward
197
131
131
141
141
151
151
SHATTUCK
OK2002304
Ellis
290
1,224
1,194
1,194
1,163
1,163
1,194
TEXAS COUNTY RWD #1
OK2007010
Texas
148
269
335
401
468
534
600
TEXHOMA
OK2007009
Texas
253
1,005
1,252
1,500
1,747
1,994
2,241
TYRONE
OK2007013
Texas
267
945
1,175
1,414
1,652
1,882
2,112
WAYNOKA
OK2007604
Woods
120
1,005
1,005
1,015
1,025
1,035
1,055
WOODS CO RWD #2
OK3007603
Woods
65
42
42
43
43
44
44
WOODWARD
OK2007701
Woodward
347
15,193
15,822
16,303
16,624
17,019
17,328
WOODWARD CO RWD #1
OK2007706
Woodward
159
380
396
408
416
426
433
WOODWARD CO RWD #2
OK2007710
Woodward
288
829
863
889
907
929
945
1 SDWIS - Safe Drinking Water Information System
2 RED ENTRY indicates data were taken from 2007 OWRB Water Rights Database. GPD=gallons per day.24 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Projections of Retail Water Demand
Each public water supply system has a “retail” demand, defined as the amount of water used by residential and non-residential customers within that provider’s service area. Public-supplied residential demand includes water provided to households for domestic uses both inside and outside the home. Non-residential demand includes customer uses at office buildings, shopping centers, industrial parks, schools, churches, hotels, and related locations served by a public water supply system. Retail demand doesn’t include wholesale water to other providers.
Municipal and Industrial (M&I) demand is driven by projected population growth and specific customer characteristics. Demand forecasts for each public system are estimated from average water use (in gallons per capita per day) multiplied by projected population. Oklahoma Department of Commerce 2002 population projections (unpublished special tabulation for the OWRB) were calibrated to 2007 Census estimates and used to establish population growth rates for cities, towns, and rural areas through 2060. Population growth rates were applied to 2007 population-served values for each provider to project future years’ service area (retail) populations.
The main source of data for per capita water use for each provider was the 2008 OCWP Provider Survey conducted by the OWRB in cooperation with the Oklahoma Rural Water Association and Oklahoma Municipal League. For each responding provider, data from the survey included population served, annual average daily demand, total water produced, wholesale purchases and sales between providers, and estimated system losses.
For missing or incomplete data, the weighted average per capita demand was used for the provider’s county. In some cases, provider survey data were supplemented with data from the OWRB water rights database. Per capita supplier demands can vary over time due to precipitation and service area characteristics, such as commercial and industrial activity, tourism, or conservation measures. For the baseline demand projections described here, the per capita demand was held constant through each of the future planning year scenarios. OCWP estimates of potential reductions in demand from conservation measures are analyzed on a basin and regional level, but not for individual provider systems.
Public Water Provider Demand Forecast
Panhandle Region
Provider
SDWIS ID1
County
Demand (AFY)
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
BEAVER
OK2000404
Beaver
450
459
467
476
481
490
BEAVER CO RWD #1 TURPIN
OK2000402
Beaver
79
80
82
83
84
86
BEAVER CO RWD #2 (GATE)
OK2000405
Beaver
16
16
17
17
17
19
BOISE CITY PWA
OK2001303
Cimarron
470
499
514
514
530
542
BUFFALO
OK2003003
Harper
248
248
248
248
255
255
DEWEY CO RWD #3
OK2007707
Woodward
68
71
73
75
76
78
FARGO
OK2002303
Ellis
48
48
48
47
47
48
FORGAN
OK2000406
Beaver
44
44
45
46
47
48
FORT SUPPLY PWA
OK3007701
Woodward
120
124
131
135
138
138
FREEDOM
OK3007601
Woods
22
22
23
23
24
24
GAGE
OK2002301
Ellis
88
86
86
84
84
86
GOODWELL
OK2007005
Texas
181
224
268
312
358
402
GUYMON
OK2007003
Texas
6,366
7,913
9,489
11,064
12,634
14,186
HARDESTY UTILITIES
OK2007004
Texas
44
55
66
77
88
99
HARPER CO WATER CORP
OK2003001
Harper
63
63
63
63
65
65
HOOKER
OK2007006
Texas
603
750
900
1,049
1,199
1,346
KEYES UTILITY AUTH
OK2001302
Cimarron
101
106
110
110
113
118
LAVERNE
OK2003002
Harper
461
461
461
461
475
475
MOORELAND
OK2007709
Woodward
339
355
366
374
382
390
OPTIMA
OK2007001
Texas
24
30
36
42
47
54
QUINLAN COMMUNITY RWD #1
OK2007708
Woodward
59
61
63
64
66
67
SEILING
OK2002205
Dewey
183
178
178
178
183
187
SHARON UTILITIES
OK2007741
Woodward
29
29
31
31
33
33
SHATTUCK
OK2002304
Ellis
397
387
387
377
377
387
TEXAS COUNTY RWD #1
OK2007010
Texas
45
55
66
78
89
99
TEXHOMA
OK2007009
Texas
285
355
425
495
566
636
TYRONE
OK2007013
Texas
282
351
422
494
562
631
WAYNOKA
OK2007604
Woods
135
135
136
138
139
142
WOODS CO RWD #2
OK3007603
Woods
3
3
3
3
3
3
WOODWARD
OK2007701
Woodward
5,900
6,144
6,331
6,455
6,609
6,729
WOODWARD CO RWD #1
OK2007706
Woodward
68
70
72
74
76
77
WOODWARD CO RWD #2
OK2007710
Woodward
268
279
287
293
300
305
1 SDWIS - Safe Drinking Water Information SystemPanhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 25
Wholesale Water Transfers
Some providers sell water on a “wholesale” basis to other providers, effectively increasing the amount of water that the selling provider must deliver and reducing the amount that the purchasing provider diverts from surface and groundwater sources. Wholesale water transfers between public water providers are fairly common and can provide an economical way to meet demand. Wholesale quantities typically vary from year to year depending upon growth, precipitation, emergency conditions, and agreements between systems.
Water transfers between providers can help alleviate costs associated with developing or maintaining infrastructure, such as a reservoir or pipeline; allow access to higher quality or more reliable sources; or provide additional supplies only when required, such as in cases of supply emergencies. Utilizing the 2008 OCWP Provider Survey and OWRB water rights data, the Wholesale Water Transfers table presents a summary of known wholesale arrangements for providers in the region. Transfers can consist of treated or raw water and can occur on a regular basis or only during emergencies. Providers commonly sell to and purchase from multiple water providers.
Wholesale Water Transfers (2010)
Panhandle Region
Provider
SDWIS ID1
Sales
Purchases
Sells To
Emergency or Ongoing
Treated or Raw or Both
Purchases from
Emergency or Ongoing
Treated or Raw or Both
BUFFALO
OK2003003
Harper Co Water Corp
O
T
FORT SUPPLY PWA
OK3007701
City of Woodward
O
T
FREEDOM
OK3007601
Woodward RWD #1
O
T
HARPER CO WATER CORP
OK2003001
Town of Buffalo
O
T
WAYNOKA
OK2007604
Woods County RWD #3
O
T
WOODWARD
OK2007701
Ft Supply PWA
O
T
WOODWARD CO RWD #1
OK2007706
Town of Freedom
O
T
1 SDWIS - Safe Drinking Water Information System26 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Provider Water Rights
Public water providers using surface water or groundwater obtain water rights from the OWRB. Water providers purchasing water from other suppliers or sources are not required to obtain water rights as long as the furnishing entity has the appropriate water right or other source of authority. Each public water provider’s current water right(s) and source of supply have been summarized in this report. The percentage of each provider’s total 2007 water rights from surface water, alluvial groundwater, and bedrock groundwater supplies was also calculated, indicating the relative proportions of sources available to each provider.
A comparison of existing water rights to projected demands can show when additional water rights or other sources and in what amounts might be needed. Forecasts of conditions for the year 2060 indicate where additional water rights may be needed to satisfy demands by that time. However, in most cases, wholesale water transfers to other providers must also be addressed by the selling provider’s water rights. Thus, the amount of water rights required will exceed the retail demand for a selling provider and will be less than the retail demand for a purchasing provider.
In preparing to meet long-term needs, public water providers should consider strategic factors appropriate to their sources of water. For example, public water providers who use surface water can seek and obtain a “schedule of use” as part of their stream water right, which addresses projected growth and consequent increases in stream water use. Such schedules of use can be employed to address increases that are anticipated to occur over many years or even decades, as an alternative to the usual requirement to use the full authorized amount of stream water in a seven-year period. On the other hand, public water providers that utilize groundwater should consider the prospect that it may be necessary to purchase or lease additional land in order to increase their groundwater rights.
Public Water Provider Water Rights and Withdrawals (2010)
Panhandle Region
Provider
SDWIS ID1
County
Permitted Quantity
Source
Permitted Surface Water
Permitted Alluvial Groundwater
Permitted Bedrock Groundwater
(AFY)
Percent
BEAVER
OK2000404
Beaver
1,125
0%
0%
100%
BEAVER CO RWD #1 TURPIN
OK2000402
Beaver
218
0%
0%
100%
BEAVER CO RWD #2 (GATE)
OK2000405
Beaver
18
0%
100%
0%
BOISE CITY PWA
OK2001303
Cimarron
2,672
0%
0%
100%
BUFFALO
OK2003003
Harper
964
0%
0%
100%
DEWEY CO RWD #3
OK2007707
Woodward
743
0%
9%
91%
FARGO
OK2002303
Ellis
221
0%
0%
100%
FORGAN
OK2000406
Beaver
1,158
0%
0%
100%
FORT SUPPLY PWA
OK3007701
Woodward
17
---
100%
---
FREEDOM
OK3007601
Woods
2
---
100%
---
GAGE
OK2002301
Ellis
1,475
0%
80%
20%
GOODWELL
OK2007005
Texas
721
0%
0%
100%
GUYMON
OK2007003
Texas
12,385
0%
1%
99%
HARDESTY UTILITIES
OK2007004
Texas
278
0%
0%
100%
HARPER CO WATER CORP
OK2003001
Harper
1,200
0%
97%
3%
HOOKER
OK2007006
Texas
884
0%
0%
100%
KEYES UTILITY AUTH
OK2001302
Cimarron
697
0%
0%
100%
LAVERNE
OK2003002
Harper
1,972
0%
100%
0%
MOORELAND
OK2007709
Woodward
1,358
0%
100%
0%
OPTIMA
OK2007001
Texas
280
0%
0%
100%
QUINLAN COMMUNITY RWD #1
OK2007708
Woodward
91
---
100%
---
SEILING
OK2002205
Dewey
383
0%
100%
0%
SHARON UTILITIES
OK2007741
Woodward
40
0%
0%
100%
SHATTUCK
OK2002304
Ellis
1,931
0%
95%
5%
TEXAS COUNTY RWD #1
OK2007010
Texas
20
0%
0%
100%
TEXHOMA
OK2007009
Texas
1,068
0%
0%
100%
TYRONE
OK2007013
Texas
595
0%
0%
100%
WAYNOKA
OK2007604
Woods
1,280
0%
100%
0%
WOODS CO RWD #2
OK3007603
Woods
---
---
---
---
WOODWARD
OK2007701
Woodward
24,045
0%
30%
70%
WOODWARD CO RWD #1
OK2007706
Woodward
1122
0%
100%
0%
WOODWARD CO RWD #2
OK2007710
Woodward
278
0%
0%
100%
1 SDWIS - Safe Drinking Water Information SystemPanhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 27
Provider Supply Plans
In 2008, a survey was sent to 785 municipal and rural water providers throughout Oklahoma to collect vital background water supply and system information. Additional detail for each of these providers was solicited in 2010 as part of follow-up interviews conducted by the ODEQ. The 2010 interviews sought to confirm key details of the earlier survey and document additional details regarding each provider’s water supply infrastructure and plans. This included information on existing sources of supply (including surface water, groundwater, and other providers), short-term supply and infrastructure plans, and long-term supply and infrastructure plans.
In instances where no new source was identified, maintenance of the current source of supply is expected into the future. Providers may or may not have secured the necessary funding to implement their stated plans concerning infrastructure needs, commonly including additional wells or raw water conveyance, storage, and replacement/upgrade of treatment and distribution systems.
Additional support for individual water providers wishing to pursue enhanced planning efforts is documented in the Public Water Supply Planning Guide. This guide details how information contained in the OCWP Watershed Planning Region Reports and related planning documents can be used to formulate provider-level plans to meet present and future needs of individual water systems.
Town of Beaver (Beaver County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: add distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional well.
Beaver County RWD 1
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Beaver County RWD 2
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional well.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Boise City PWA (Cimarron County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
New water supply sources: drill new wells.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Town of Buffalo (Harper County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
Construct new water lines.
Dewey County RWD 3 (Woodward County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Town of Vici.
Long-Term Needs
Drill additional wells, includes land acquisition.
Town of Fargo (Ellis County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: improve existing wells.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional wells.
Town of Forgan (Beaver County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Fort Supply PWA (Woodward County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary sources: Woodward groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Town of Freedom (Woods County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Woodward County RWD 1
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Town of Gage (Ellis County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Ogallala, Wolf Creek Alluvial Aquifer
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional well.
Infrastructure improvements: relocate cast iron water mains.
Town of Goodwell (Texas County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
New supply source: water reuse.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional well.
City of Guymon (Texas County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Ogallala Aquifer
Short-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional well.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace water lines and meters; construct additional storage; rehabilitate water tower and pump station.
Hardesty Utilities (Texas County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Emergency source: Groundwater (impacted by MtBE)
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Construct new water line.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Harper County Water Corp.
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Buffalo groundwater.
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Town of Hooker (Texas County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Ogallala Aquifer
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional well(s).
Keyes Utility Auth. (Cimarron County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: construct new storage tank.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional wells.
Infrastructure improvements: replace water lines.
Town of Laverne (Harper County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Beaver River Aquifer
Short-Term Needs
None required.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: possibly replace water mains and upgrade storage.
Town of Mooreland (Woodward County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary sources: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None required.
Long-Term Needs
None required.
Town of Optima (Texas County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None required.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Construct one additional well.
OCWP Water Provider Survey (1 of 2)
Panhandle Region28 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
OCWP Water Provider Survey (2 of 2)
Panhandle Region
Quinlan Community RWD 1 (Woodward County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: N. Canadian Alluvial and Terrace Aquifer
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
New water supply sources: drill additional wells or purchase from nearby system. Infrastructure improvements: expand transmission and treatment capacity.
City of Seiling (Dewey County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None required.
Long-Term Needs
None required.
Sharon Utilities (Woodward County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None required.
Long-Term Needs
None required.
Town of Shattuck (Ellis County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Oscar B Aquifer
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Expand existing well system and storage.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Expand existing well system and storage.
Texas County RWD 1
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Distribution system may need replacement.
Town of Texhoma (Texas County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Town of Tyrone (Texas County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: possibly drill one additional well.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Replace distribution lines and refurbish water tower.
City of Waynoka (Woods County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Replace reverse osmosis units
Long-Term Needs
New water supply sources: Drill new wells.
Woods County RWD 2
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Coldwater, Kansas
Short-Term Needs
None required.
Long-Term Needs
None required.
City of Woodward (Woodward County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Expand existing well field.
Long-Term Needs
New water supply sources: Expand existing well field.
Woodward County RWD 1
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Drill one additional well.
Long-Term Needs
None required.
Woodward County RWD 2
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Drill one additional well.
Long-Term Needs
None required. Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 29
Drinking Water Infrastructure Cost Summary
As part of the public water provider analysis, regional cost estimates to meet system drinking water infrastructure needs over the next 50 years were prepared. While it is difficult to account for changes that may occur within this extended time frame, it is beneficial to evaluate, at least on the order-of-magnitude level, the long-range costs of providing potable water.
Project cost estimates were developed for a selection of existing water providers, and then weighted to determine total regional costs. The OCWP method is similar to that utilized by the EPA to determine national drinking water infrastructure costs in 2007. However, the OCWP uses a 50-year planning horizon while the EPA uses a 20-year period. Also, the OCWP includes a broader spectrum of project types rather than limiting projects to those eligible for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund program. While costs for new reservoirs specific to providers are not included, this study evaluated whether there was an overall need in the region for new surface water supplies. When rehabilitation of existing reservoirs or new reservoir projects were necessary, these costs were applied at the regional level.
More information on the methodology and cost estimates is available in the supplemental report, Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Assessment by Region.
Infrastructure Cost Summary
Panhandle Region
Provider System Category1
Infrastructure Need (millions of 2007 dollars)
Present - 2020
2021 - 2040
2041 - 2060
Total Period
Small
$288
$291
$129
$708
Medium
$48
$68
$68
$184
Large
$0
$0
$0
$0
Reservoir2
$0
$0
$38
$38
Total
$336
$359
$235
$930
1 Large providers are defined as those serving more than 100,000 people, medium systems as those serving between 3,301 and 100,000 people, and small systems as those serving 3,300 or fewer people.
2 The “reservoir” category refers specifically to rehabilitation projects.
Approximately $930 million is needed to meet the projected drinking water infrastructure • needs of the Panhandle region over the next 50 years. The infrastructure costs are expected to occur at a relatively constant rate over time.
Distribution and transmission projects account for more than 85% of the providers’ • estimated infrastructure costs, followed distantly by water treatment and source water projects.
Small providers, which include nearly all providers in the Panhandle Region, have the • largest overall drinking water infrastructure costs.
Projects involving rehabilitation of existing reservoirs comprise approximately 4% of the • total costs. These costs are expected to be incurred after 2040.30 Panhandle Regional Report, Basin Data & Analysis
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Supply Options
Limitations Analysis
For each of the state’s 82 OCWP basins, an analysis of water supply and demand was followed by an analysis of limitations for surface water, bedrock groundwater, and alluvial groundwater use. For surface water, the most pertinent limiting characteristics considered were (1) physical availability of water, (2) permit availability, and (3) water quality. For alluvial and bedrock groundwater, permit availability was not a limiting factor through 2060, and existing data were insufficient to conduct meaningful groundwater quality analyses. Therefore, limitations for major alluvial and bedrock aquifers were related to physical availability of water and included an analysis of both the amount of any forecasted depletion relative to the amount of water in storage and rate at which the depletion was predicted to occur.
Methodologies were developed to assess limitations and assign appropriate scores for each supply source in each basin. For surface water, scores were calculated weighting the characteristics as follows: 50% for physical availability, 30% for permit availability, and 20% for water quality. For alluvial and bedrock groundwater scores, the magnitude of depletion relative to amount of water in storage and rate of depletion were each weighted 50%.
The resulting supply limitation scores were used to rank all 82 basins for surface water, major alluvial groundwater, and major bedrock groundwater sources (see Water Supply Limitations map on page 5). For each source, basins ranking the highest were considered to be “significantly limited” in the ability of that source to meet forecasted demands reliably. Basins with intermediate rankings were considered to be “potentially limited” for that source, and basins with the lowest rankings were considered to be “minimally limited” for that source and not projected to have any gaps or depletions. For bedrock and alluvial groundwater rankings, “potentially limited” was the baseline default given to basins lacking major aquifers due to typically lower yields and insufficient data.
Based on an analysis of all three sources of water, the basins with the most advanced limitations—the most severe water supply challenges—were identified as “Hot Spots.” A discussion of the methodologies used in identifying Hot Spots, results, and recommendations can be found in the OCWP Executive Report.
Primary Options
To provide a range of potential solutions for mitigation of water supply shortages in each of the 82 OCWP basins, five primary options were evaluated for potential effectiveness: (1) demand management, (2) use of out-of-basin supplies, (3) reservoir use, (4) increasing reliance on surface water, and (5) increasing reliance on groundwater. For each basin, the potential effectiveness of each primary option was assigned one of three ratings: (1) typically effective, (2) potentially effective, and (3) likely ineffective (see Water Supply Option Effectiveness map on page 6). No options were necessary in basins where no gaps or depletions were anticipated.
Demand Management
“Demand management” refers to the potential to reduce water demands and alleviate gaps or depletions by implementing drought management or conservation measures. Demand management is a vitally important tool that can be implemented either temporarily or permanently to decrease demand and increase available supply. “Drought management” refers to short-term measures, such as temporary restrictions on outdoor watering, while “conservation measures” refers to long-term activities that result in consistent water savings throughout the year. Municipal and industrial conservation techniques can include modifying customer behaviors, using more efficient plumbing fixtures, or eliminating water leaks. Agricultural conservation techniques can include reducing water demand through more efficient irrigation systems and production of crops with decreased water requirements.
Two specific scenarios for conservation were analyzed for the OCWP—moderate and substantial—to assess the relative effectiveness in reducing statewide water demand in the two largest demand sectors, Municipal/Industrial and Crop Irrigation. For the Watershed Planning Region reports, only moderately expanded conservation activities were considered when assessing the overall effectiveness of Demand Management for each basin. A broader analysis of moderate and substantial conservation measures statewide is discussed below and summarized in the “Expanded Options” section of the OCWP Executive Report.
Demand management was considered to be “typically effective” in basins where it would likely eliminate both gaps and storage depletions and “potentially effective” in basins where it would likely either reduce gaps and depletions or eliminate either gaps or depletions (but not both). There were no basins where demand management could not reduce gaps and/or storage depletions to at least some extent; therefore this option was not rated “likely ineffective” for any basin.
Out-of-Basin Supplies
Use of “out-of-basin supplies” refers to the option of transferring water through pipelines from a source in one basin to another basin. This option was considered a “potentially effective” solution in all basins due to its general potential in eliminating gaps and depletions. The option was not rated “typically effective” because complexity and cost make it only practical as a long-term solution. The effectiveness of this option for a basin was also assessed with the consideration of potential new reservoir sites within the respective region as identified in the Expanded Options section below and the OCWP Reservoir Viability Study report.
Reservoir Use
“Reservoir Use” refers to the development of additional in-basin reservoir storage. Reservoir storage can be provided through increased use of existing facilities, such as reallocation of existing purposes at major federal reservoir sites or rehabilitation of smaller NRCS projects to include municipal and/or industrial water supply, or the construction of new reservoirs.
The effectiveness rating of reservoir use for a basin was based on a hypothetical reservoir located at the furthest downstream basin outlet. Water transmission and legal or water quality constraints were not considered; however, potential constraints in permit availability were noted. A site located further upstream could potentially provide adequate yield to meet demand, but would likely require greater storage than a site located at the basin outlet. The effectiveness rating was also largely contingent upon the existence of previously studied reservoir sites (see the Expanded Options section below) and/or the ability of new streamflow diversions with storage to meet basin water demands.
Reservoir use was considered “typically effective” in basins containing one or more potentially viable reservoir site(s) unless the basin was fully allocated for surface water and had no permit availability. For basins with no permit availability, reservoir use was considered “potentially effective,” since diversions would be limited to existing permits. Reservoir use was also considered “potentially effective” in basins that generate Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 31
sufficient reservoir yield to meet future demand. Statewide, the reservoir use option was considered “likely ineffective” in only three basins (Basins 18, 55, and 66), where it was determined that insufficient streamflow would be available to provide an adequate reservoir yield to meet basin demand.
Increasing Reliance on
Surface Water
“Increasing reliance on surface water” refers to changing the surface water-groundwater use ratio to meet future demands by increasing surface water use. For baseline analysis, the proportion of future demand supplied by surface water and groundwater for each sector is assumed equal to current proportions. Increasing the use of surface water through direct diversions, without reservoir storage or releases upstream from storage provides a reliable supply option in limited areas of the state and has potential to mitigate bedrock groundwater depletions and/or alluvial groundwater depletions. However, this largely depends upon local conditions concerning the specific location, amount, and timing of the diversion.
Due to this uncertainty, the pronounced periods of low streamflow in many river systems across the state, and the potential to create or augment surface water gaps, this option was considered “typically ineffective” for all basins. The preferred alternative statewide is reservoir use, which provides the most reliable surface water supply source.
Increasing Reliance on
Groundwater
“Increasing reliance on groundwater” refers to changing the surface water-groundwater use ratio to meet future demands by increasing groundwater use. Supplies from major aquifers are particularly reliable because they generally exhibit higher well yields and contain large amounts of water in storage. Minor aquifers can also contain large amounts of water in storage, but well yields are typically lower and may be insufficient to meet the needs of high volume water users. Site-specific information on the suitability of minor aquifers for supply should be considered prior to large-scale use. Additional groundwater supplies may also be developed through artificial recharge (groundwater storage and recovery), which is summarized in the “Expanded Options” section of the OWRB Executive Report.
Increased reliance on groundwater supplies was considered “typically effective” in basins where both gaps and depletions could be mitigated in a measured fashion that did not lead to additional groundwater depletions. This option was considered “potentially effective” in basins where surface water gaps could be mitigated by increased groundwater use, but would likely result in increased depletions in either alluvial or bedrock groundwater storage. Increased reliance on groundwater supplies was considered “typically ineffective” in basins where there were no major aquifers.
Expanded Options
In addition to the standard analysis of primary options for each basin, specific OCWP studies were conducted statewide on several more advanced though less conventional options that have potential to reduce basin gaps and depletions. More detailed summaries of these options are available in the OWRB Executive Report. Full reports are available on the OWRB website.
Expanded Conservation Measures
Water conservation was considered an essential component of the “demand management” option in basin-level analysis of options for reducing or eliminating gaps and storage depletions. At the basin level, moderately expanded conservation measures were used as the basis for analyzing effectiveness. In a broader OCWP study, summarized in the OCWP Executive Report and documented in the report Water Demand Forecast Report Addendum: Conservation and Climate Change, both moderately and substantially expanded conservation activities were analyzed at a statewide level for the state’s two largest demand sectors: Municipal/ Industrial (M&I) and Crop Irrigation. For each sector, two scenarios were analyzed: (1) moderately expanded conservation activities, and (2) substantially expanded conservation activities. Water savings for the municipal and industrial and crop irrigation water use sectors were assessed, and for the M&I sector, a cost-benefit analysis was performed to quantify savings associated with reduced costs in drinking water production and decreased wastewater treatment. The energy savings and associated water savings realized as a result of these decreases were also quantified.
Artificial Aquifer Recharge
In 2008, the Oklahoma Legislature passed Senate Bill 1410 requiring the OWRB to develop and implement criteria to prioritize potential locations throughout the state where artificial recharge demonstration projects are most feasible to meet future water supply challenges. A workgroup of numerous water agencies and user groups was organized to identify suitable locations in both alluvial and bedrock aquifers. Fatal flaw and threshold screening analyses resulted in identification of six alluvial sites and nine bedrock sites. These sites were subjected to further analysis that resulted in three sites deemed by the workgroup as having the best potential for artificial recharge demonstration projects.
Where applicable, potential recharge sites are noted in the “Increasing Reliance on Groundwater” option discussion in basin data and analysis sections of the Watershed Planning Region Reports. The site selection methodology and results for the five selected sites are summarized in the OCWP Executive Report; more detailed information on the workgroup and study is presented in the OCWP report Artificial Aquifer Recharge Issues and Recommendations.
Marginal Quality Water Sources
In 2008, the Oklahoma Legislature passed Senate Bill 1627 requiring the OWRB to establish a technical workgroup to analyze the expanded use of marginal quality water (MQW) from various sources throughout the state. The group included representatives from state and federal agencies, industry, and other stakeholders. Through facilitated discussions, the group defined MQW as that which has been historically unusable due to technological or economic issues associated with diverting, treating, and/or conveying the water. Five categories of MQW were identified for further characterization and technical analysis: (1) treated wastewater effluent, (2) stormwater runoff, (3) oil and gas flowback/produced water, (4) brackish surface and groundwater, and (5) water with elevated levels of key constituents, such as nitrates, that would require advanced treatment prior to beneficial use.
A phased approach was utilized to meet the study’s objectives, which included quantifying and characterizing MQW sources and their locations for use through 2060, assessing constraints to MQW use, and matching identified sources of MQW with projected water shortages across the state along with a determination of feasibility. Of all the general MQW uses evaluated, water reuse—beneficially using treated wastewater to meet certain demand—is perhaps the most commonly applied elsewhere in the U.S. Similarly, wastewater was determined to be one of the most viable sources of marginal quality water for short-term use in Oklahoma. Results of the workgroup’s study are summarized in the OCWP Executive Report; more detailed information on the workgroup and study is presented in the OCWP report Marginal Quality Water Issues and Recommendations.
Potential Reservoir Development
Oklahoma is the location of many reservoirs that provide a dependable, vital water supply source for numerous purposes. While economic, environmental, cultural, and geographical constraints generally limit the construction of new reservoirs, significant interest persists due to their potential in meeting various future needs, particularly those associated with municipalities and feasible regional public supply systems.32 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
As another option to address Oklahoma’s long-range water needs, the OCWP reservoir viability study was initiated to identify potential reservoir sites throughout the state that have been analyzed to various degrees by the OWRB, Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and other public or private agencies. Principal elements of the study included extensive literature search; identification of criteria to determine a reservoir’s viability; creation of a database to store essential information for each site; evaluation of sites; Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping of the most viable sites; aerial photograph and map reconnaissance; screening of environmental, cultural, and endangered species issues; estimates of updated construction costs; and categorical assessment of viability. The study revealed more than 100 sites statewide. Each was assigned a ranking, ranging from Category 4 (sites with at least adequate information that are viable candidates for future development) to Category 0 (sites that exist only on a historical map and for which no study data can be verified).
This analysis does not necessarily indicate an actual need or specific recommendation to build any potential project. Rather, these sites are presented to provide local and regional decision-makers with additional tools as they anticipate future water supply needs and opportunities. Study results present only a cursory examination of the many factors associated with project feasibility or implementation. Detailed investigations would be required in all cases to verify feasibility of construction and implementation. A summary of potential reservoir sites statewide is available in the OCWP Executive Report; more detailed information on the workgroup and study is presented in the OCWP Reservoir Viability Study report.
Reservoir Project Viability Categorization
Category 4: Sites with at least adequate information that are viable candidates for future development.
Category 3: Sites with sufficient data for analysis, but less than desirable for current viability.
Category 2: Sites that may contain fatal flaws or other factors that could severely impede potential development.
Category 1: Sites with limited available data and lacking essential elements of information.
Category 0: Typically sites that exist only on an historical map. Study data cannot be located or verified.
Potential Reservoir Sites (Categories 3 & 4)
Panhandle Region
Name
Category
Stream
Basin
Purposes1
Total Storage
Conservation Pool
Primary Study
Updated Cost Estimate2
(2010 dollars)
Surface Area
Storage
Dependable Yield
Date
Agency
AF
Acres
AF
AF/Y
Englewood
4
Cimarron River
65
IR, FC, F&W, R
424,400
7,400
63,500
36,967
1947
Bureau of Reclamation
$431,898,000
Forgan
3
Cimarron River
65
WS, F&W, R
129,000
3,668
77,500
24,100
1991
Bureau of Reclamation
$225,777,000
1 WS = Water Supply, FC = Flood Control, IR = Irrigation, HP = Hydroelectric Power, WQ = Water Quality, C = Conservation, R = Recreation, FW= Fish & Wildlife, CW = Cooling Water, N = Navigation, LF = Low Flow Regulation
2 The majority of cost estimates were updated using estimated costs from previous project reports combined with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Construction Cost Index System (CWCCIS) annual escalation figures to scale the original cost estimates to present-day cost estimates. These estimated costs may not accurately reflect current conditions at the proposed project site and are meant to be used for general comparative purposes only.Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 33
Expanded Water Supply Options
Panhandle Region35
BASIN 52
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Data & Analysis
Panhandle Watershed Planning Region
Basin 5236 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Basin 52 Summary
Basin 52 accounts for about 3% of the current water demand in the Panhandle Watershed Planning Region. About 72% of the demand is from the Crop Irrigation demand sector. The second largest demand sector is Municipal and Industrial at 10%, which includes a number of small municipal providers and rural water districts. Surface water satisfies only about 3% of the total demand in the basin. Groundwater satisfies about 97% of the demand (67% alluvial and 30% bedrock). The peak summer month demand in Basin 52 is about 8 times the winter demand, which is more pronounced than the overall statewide pattern.
The entire water supply yield of Canton Lake, which is located at the basin outlet, is fully allocated to Oklahoma City (Basin 50) and is not expected to provide additional supplies in Basin 52. Historically, the North Canadian River at Canton has undergone frequent periods of very low flows in each month of the year. Relative to other basins in the state, surface water quality in Basin 52 is considered good. However, Bent Creek, a tributary to the North Canadian River, is impaired for Agricultural use due to high levels of sulfate. The North Canadian stream system is currently fully allocated and has no permit availability.
The majority of current groundwater rights are in the Ogallala and North Canadian River aquifers. Each of these aquifers has approximately 1.8 million acre-feet of water stored within the basin. There are no significant basin-wide groundwater quality issues. Localized areas with high levels of nitrate have been found in the overall boundaries of the Ogallala and North Canadian River aquifers and may occur in Basin 52. The use of groundwater to meet in-basin demand is not expected to be limited by the availability of permits through 2060.
The projected 2060 water demand of 14,290 AFY in Basin 52 reflects a 1,280 AFY increase (10%) over 2010 demand. The Crop Irrigation demand sector will
Synopsis
Most water users are expected to continue to rely primarily on the basin’s alluvial and • bedrock aquifers.
By 2020, alluvial and bedrock groundwater use is expected to exceed recharge rates • and thus draw from aquifer storage.
There is a high probability that periodic surface water gaps will occur by 2050.•
To reduce the risk of adverse impacts on water supplies, it is recommended that • storage depletions and gaps be decreased where economically feasible.
Additional conservation or new small reservoirs could reduce the adverse effects of • localized groundwater storage depletions.
Alternatives to direct surface water diversions, such as groundwater supplies and/or • developing new small reservoirs, could eliminate gaps.
BASIN 52
Current Demand by Source and Sector
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Total Demand
13,010 AFY
Water Resources
Panhandle Region, Basin 52Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 37
be the largest demand sector in the basin; however minimal growth is expected. The largest growth in demand will occur from two currently minor demand sectors: Oil and Gas and Thermoelectric Power.
Gaps & Depletions
Based on projected demand and historical hydrology, groundwater storage depletions are expected to occur as early as 2020, and surface water gaps are expected by 2050. By 2060, surface water gaps have a 76% probability of occurring in at least one month during the year and will total as much as 70 AFY. Alluvial storage depletions will occur in almost every year in amounts up to 880 AFY. By 2060, bedrock storage depletions are expected to increase to 170 AFY. Alluvial and bedrock groundwater storage depletions are minimal compared to the total groundwater storage in the basin and should not constrain use over the planning horizon. However, localized storage depletions may adversely impact well yields, water quality, and/or pumping costs.
Options
Most water users are expected to continue to rely heavily on groundwater supplies. To reduce the risk of adverse impacts on water supplies, it is recommended that storage depletions and gaps be decreased where economically feasible.
Moderately expanded permanent conservation activities in the Municipal and Industrial and Crop Irrigation sectors could reduce gaps and storage depletions. The basin should focus on permanent conservation activities, instead of temporary drought management activities, since gaps and storage depletions will occur in almost every year.
Out-of-basin supplies may be developed to supplement the basin’s water supplies and reduce or eliminate gaps and storage depletions. The OCWP Reservoir Viability Study, which evaluated the potential for reservoirs throughout the state, identified two potentially viable out-of-basin sites in the Panhandle Watershed Planning Region. However, out-of-basin supplies may not be cost-effective for all users based on the availability of groundwater resources and distance to reliable surface water supplies.
New reservoir storage could potentially mitigate surface water gaps in the basin. However, as the stream system is currently fully allocated, substantial permit issues would have to be resolved in order to construct new reservoir storage, and any new reservoirs could not impact Canton Lake’s yield.
Increased reliance on surface water through direct diversions, without reservoir storage, would increase gaps and is not recommended on a basin scale. Also, there is no additional surface water permit availability in the basin.
Increased reliance on groundwater supplies could mitigate surface water gaps, but would increase the amount of groundwater storage depletions. Any increases in storage depletions would be minimal relative to the volume of water in aquifer storage in the basin.
BASIN 52
Water Supply Option Effectiveness
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Demand Management
Out-of-Basin Supplies
Reservoir Use
Increasing Supply from Surface Water
Increasing Supply from Groundwater
nTypically EffectivenPotentially EffectivenLikely IneffectivenNo Option Necessary
Water Supply Limitations
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Surface Water
Alluvial Groundwater
Bedrock Groundwater
nMinimalnPotentialnSignificant
Median Historical Streamflow
at the Basin Outlet
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Projected Water Demand
Panhandle Region, Basin 5238 Panhandle Regional Report, Basin Data & Analysis Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Basin 52 Data & Analysis
Historical Precipitation
Regional Climate Division
Surface Water Resources
Basin 52 receives greater precipitation than • other basins in the Panhandle Region due to its eastward extent. However, the majority of the streamflow in the North Canadian River at Canton has historically been generated in upstream basins. Historical streamflow from 1950 through 2007 was used to estimate the range of future surface water supplies. The North Canadian River at Canton had prolonged periods of below-average streamflow from the early 1960s to the mid 1980s. From the mid 1990s to the early 2000s, the basin went through a prolonged period of above-average flow and precipitation, demonstrating the hydrologic variability in the basin.
The range of historical streamflow at the basin • outlet is shown by the average, median, and minimum streamflow over a 58-year period of record. The portion of the North Canadian River in Basin 52 is considered perennial (flows throughout the year). The median monthly streamflow is greater than 750 AF/month in all months and greater than 2,000 AF/month in the spring and summer. However, the river can experience prolonged periods of low flow in any month of the year. Relative to other basins in the state, the surface water quality in Basin 52 is considered good.
Streamflow at the basin outlet is regulated by • Canton Lake. Canton Lake provides 16,200 AFY of dependable yield to Oklahoma City, but is not expected to provide future supplies for Basin 52.
BASIN 52
Monthly Historical Streamflow at the Basin Outlet
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Historical Streamflow at the Basin Outlet
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
nPrimarily Measured Flows
nMeasured/Synthesized Flows
nSignificant Synthesized Flows
Streamflow Data Source
Panhandle Region, Basin 52Panhandle Regional Report, Basin Data & Analysis 39
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
BASIN 52
Groundwater Resources
The majority of water rights in the basin • are from the North Canadian River Ogallala aquifers. The North Canadian River aquifer is located along the northern border of the basin and has approximately 1.8 million acre-feet of in-basin storage. The Ogallala aquifer is located in the southwestern portion of the basin and has approximately 1.9 million acre-feet of in-basin storage. Estimated Ogallala aquifer recharge in the basin is 3,000 AFY. There are substantial water rights from non-delineated bedrock aquifers in roughly the central and southeastern portions of the basin.
There are no significant groundwater • quality issues in Basin 52.
Groundwater Resources - Aquifer Summary (2010)
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Aquifer
Portion of Basin Overlaying Aquifer
Current Groundwater Rights
Aquifer Storage in Basin
Equal Proportionate Share
Groundwater Available for New Permits
Name
Type
Class1
Percent
AFY
AF
AFY/Acre
AFY
Canadian River
Alluvial
Major
1%
0
12,000
temporary 2.0
12,800
North Canadian River
Alluvial
Major
36%
40,000
1,778,000
1.0
165,700
Ogallala
Bedrock
Major
24%
9,900
1,881,000
1.4
268,500
Non-Delineated Groundwater Source
Bedrock
Minor
N/A
10,100
N/A
temporary 2.0
N/A
Non-Delineated Groundwater Source
Alluvial
Minor
N/A
0
N/A
temporary 2.0
N/A
1 Bedrock aquifers with typical yields greater than 50 gpm and alluvial aquifers with typical yields greater than 150 gpm are considered major.40 Panhandle Regional Report, Basin Data & Analysis Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Demand
Basin 52’s water demand is about • 3% of the Panhandle Region’s total demand and will increase by 10% (1,280 AFY) from 2010 to 2060. The Crop Irrigation demand sector will be the largest demand sector over the next 50 years; however minimal growth is expected. The majority of growth in demand will occur from two currently minor demand sectors: Oil and Gas and Thermoelectric Power.
Surface water is used to supply 3% of the • total demand in Basin 52 and its use will increase by 46% (180 AFY) from 2010 to 2060. Oil and Gas surface water use is expected to be as large as Crop Irrigation surface water use by 2060.
Alluvial groundwater is used to supply • 67% of the total demand in Basin 52 and will increase by 9% (790 AFY) from 2010 to 2060. The Thermoelectric Power demand sector will account for approximately 50% of the growth in alluvial groundwater use.
Bedrock groundwater is used to supply • 30% of the total demand in Basin 52 and will increase by 8% (310 AFY) from 2010 to 2060.
BASIN 52
Total Demand by Sector
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Planning Horizon
Crop Irrigation
Livestock
Municipal & Industrial
Oil & Gas
Self Supplied Industrial
Self Supplied Residential
Thermoelectric Power
Total
AFY
2010
9,310
1,220
1,340
170
0
440
530
13,010
2020
9,330
1,230
1,380
240
0
450
590
13,220
2030
9,350
1,240
1,420
330
0
470
660
13,470
2040
9,370
1,250
1,440
440
0
470
740
13,710
2050
9,380
1,260
1,470
560
0
480
820
13,970
2060
9,410
1,270
1,500
700
0
490
920
14,290
Surface Water Demand
by Sector
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Alluvial Groundwater Demand
by Sector
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Bedrock Groundwater Demand
by Sector
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
nThermoelectric Power nSelf Supplied Residential nSelf Supplied Industrial nOil & Gas nMunicipal & Industrial nLivestock nCrop IrrigationOklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Panhandle Regional Report, Basin Data & Analysis 41
BASIN 52
Current Monthly Demand Distribution by Sector
The Municipal and Industrial and Self • Supplied Residential demand sectors use 50% more water in summer months than in winter months. Crop Irrigation has a high demand in summer months and little or no demand in winter months. The Livestock and Oil and Gas demand sectors have more consistent demand throughout the year. Thermoelectric Power water use peaks in August and is near zero in November.
Current Monthly Demand Distribution by Source
The peak summer month total water • demand in Basin 52 is about 10 times the monthly winter demand, which is more pronounced than the overall statewide pattern. The peak summer month surface water demand is about 6 times the monthly winter demand. The peak summer month alluvial and bedrock groundwater demand is about 11 times the monthly winter demand.
Monthly Demand Distribution by Sector (2010)
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Monthly Demand Distribution by Source (2010)
Panhandle Region, Basin 5242 Panhandle Regional Report, Basin Data & Analysis Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Gaps and Storage Depletions
Based on projected demand and historical hydrology, • groundwater storage depletions are projected to occur by 2020 and surface water gaps by 2050.
Surface water gaps in Basin 52 may occur throughout the • year. Surface water gaps in 2060 will be up to 11% (10 AF/month) of the surface water demand in the peak summer month, and as much as 33% (10 AF/month) of the peak winter month’s surface water demand. By 2060, there will be a 76% probability of gaps occurring in at least one month of the year. Surface water gaps are most likely to occur during winter months.
Alluvial groundwater storage depletions in Basin 52 may • occur throughout the year, peaking in size during the summer. Alluvial groundwater storage depletions in 2060 will be up to 7% (160 AF/month) of the alluvial groundwater demand in the peak summer month. Storage depletions are smaller in size during the winter, but will be as much as 30% (90 AF/month) of the peak winter months’ alluvial groundwater demand. By 2060, there will be a 93% probability of storage depletions occurring in at least one month of the year. Alluvial groundwater storage depletions are least likely to occur in spring months.
Bedrock groundwater storage depletions in Basin 52 • may occur during the spring, summer, and fall. Bedrock groundwater storage depletions in 2060 will be 5% (30 AF/month) of the bedrock groundwater demand on average in the peak summer month’s, and 9% (30 AF/month) on average of the peak spring month’s bedrock groundwater demand.
Projected groundwater storage depletions are minimal relative • to the amount of water in storage in the aquifers. However, localized storage depletions may adversely impact water well yields, water quality, and/or pumping costs.
BASIN 52
Magnitude and Probability of Annual
Gaps and Storage Depletions
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Planning Horizon
Maximum Gaps/Storage Depletions
Probability of Gaps/Storage Depletions
Surface Water
Alluvial Groundwater
Bedrock Groundwater
Surface Water
Alluvial Groundwater
AFY
Percent
2020
0
130
40
0%
93%
2030
0
320
60
0%
93%
2040
0
500
100
0%
93%
2050
30
680
140
57%
93%
2060
70
880
170
76%
93%
Alluvial Groundwater Storage Depletions by Season (2060 Demands)
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Months (Season)
Maximum Storage Depletion1
Median Storage Depletion
Probability
AF/month
AF/month
Percent
Dec-Feb (Winter)
90
50
66%
Mar-May (Spring)
70
50
48%
Jun-Aug (Summer)
160
100
62%
Sep-Nov (Fall)
80
70
59%
1 Amount shown represents largest amount for any one month in season indicated.
Surface Water Gaps by Season
(2060 Demands)
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Months (Season)
Maximum Gap 1
Median Gap
Probability

Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Report on the
Panhandle
Watershed Planning Region
Oklahoma Water Resources BoardOklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Report on the
Panhandle Watershed Planning RegionStatewide OCWP Watershed Planning Region
and Basin Delineation
Contents
Introduction 1
Regional Overview . 1
Regional Summary 2
Synopsis . 2
Water Resources & Limitations 2
Water Supply Options . 4
Water Supply . 6
Physical Water Availability . 6
Surface Water Resources 6
Groundwater Resources . 9
Permit Availability 11
Water Quality 12
Water Demand . 20
Public Water Providers . 22
OCWP Provider Survey 27
Water Supply Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
Limitations Analysis 30
Primary Options 30
Demand Management 30
Out-of-Basin Supplies . 30
Reservoir Use 30
Increasing Reliance on Surface Water . 31
Increasing Reliance on Groundwater 31
Expanded Options 31
Expanded Conservation Measures . 31
Artificial Aquifer Recharge 31
Marginal Quality Water Sources 31
Potential Reservoir Development 31
Basin Summaries and Data & Analysis . 35
Basin 52 . 35
Basin 53 . 45
Basin 54 . 55
Basin 55 . 65
Basin 65 . 75
Basin 66 . 85
Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94
Panhandle Regional Report 1
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
The Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan (OCWP) was originally developed in 1980 and last updated in 1995. With the specific objective of establishing a reliable supply of water for state users throughout at least the next 50 years, the current update represents the most ambitious and intensive water planning effort ever undertaken by the state. The 2012 OCWP Update is guided by two ultimate goals:
Provide safe and dependable water supply 1. for all Oklahomans while improving the economy and protecting the environment.
Provide information so that water 2. providers, policy makers, and water users can make informed decisions concerning the use and management of Oklahoma’s water resources.
In accordance with the goals, the 2012 OCWP Update has been developed under an innovative parallel-path approach: inclusive and dynamic public participation to build sound water policy complemented by detailed technical evaluations.
Also unique to this update are studies conducted according to specific geographic boundaries (watersheds) rather than political boundaries (counties). This new strategy involved subdividing the state into 82 surface water basins for water supply availability analysis (see the OCWP Physical Water Supply Availability Report). Existing watershed boundaries were revised to include a United States Geological Survey (USGS) stream gage at or near the basin outlet (downstream boundary), where practical. To facilitate consideration of regional supply challenges and potential solutions, basins were aggregated into 13 distinct Watershed Planning Regions.
This Watershed Planning Region Report, one of 13 such documents prepared for the 2012 OCWP Update, presents elements of technical studies pertinent to the Panhandle Region. Each regional report presents information from both a regional and multiple basin perspective, including water supply/demand analysis results, forecasted water supply shortages, potential supply solutions and alternatives, and supporting technical information.
Integral to the development of these reports was the Oklahoma H2O model, a sophisticated database and geographic information system (GIS) based analysis tool created to compare projected water demand to physical supplies in each of the 82 OCWP basins statewide. Recognizing that water planning is not a static process but rather a dynamic one, this versatile tool can be updated over time as new supply and demand data become available, and can be used to evaluate a variety of “what-if” scenarios at the basin level, such as a change in supply sources, demand, new reservoirs, and various other policy management scenarios.
Primary inputs to the model include demand projections for each decade through 2060, founded on widely-accepted methods and
Introduction
The primary factors in the determination of reliable future water supplies are physical supplies, water rights, water quality, and infrastructure. Gaps and depletions occur when demand exceeds supply, and can be attributed to physical supply, water rights, infrastructure, or water quality constraints.
As a key foundation of OCWP technical work, a computer-based analysis tool, “Oklahoma H2O,” was created to compare projected demands with physical supplies for each basin to identify areas of potential water shortages.peer review of inputs and results by state and federal agency staff, industry representatives, and stakeholder groups for each demand sector. Surface water supply data for each of the 82 basins used 58 years of publicly-available daily streamflow gage data collected by the USGS. Groundwater resources were characterized using previously-developed assessments of groundwater aquifer storage and recharge rates.
Additional information gained during the development of the 2012 Update is provided in various OCWP supplemental reports. Assessments of statewide physical water availability and potential shortages are documented in the OCWP Physical Water Supply Availability Report. Statewide water demand projection methods and results are presented in the Water Demand Forecast Report. Permitting availability was evaluated based on the OWRB’s administrative protocol and documented in the Water Supply Permit Availability Report. All supporting documentation can be found on the OWRB’s website.
Regional Overview
The Panhandle Watershed Planning Region includes six basins (numbered 52-55 and 65-66 for reference). The region encompasses 9,426 square miles in northwest Oklahoma, spanning from the Panhandle counties of Cimarron, Texas, and Beaver, and extending to the southeast through all of Harper County and portions of Woods, Woodward, Major, Blaine, Dewey, and Ellis Counties.
The region is in the Great Plains and Central Lowland physiography provinces. Cimarron, Texas, and Beaver Counties in the Panhandle are generally flat while the remainder of the region is characterized by rough terrain marked with high sand hills and deep erosion. The highest elevation in Oklahoma, Black Mesa Plateau, is found in the far northwestern corner of Cimarron County.
The climate is semi-arid in the Panhandle and sub-humid in the remainder of the region, with mean annual temperatures ranging from 54°F in the Panhandle to 60°F in the southeast corner of the region. Precipitation ranges from 16 inches in the west to 28 inches in the southeast. Annual evaporation is significant, ranging from 56 to 64 inches.
The largest cities in the region include Woodward (2010 population of 12,206) and Guymon (11,382). The greatest demand is from Crop Irrigation water use.
By 2060, this region is projected to have a total demand of 473,800 acre-feet per year (AFY), an increase of approximately 83,000 AFY (21%) from 2010.2 Panhandle Regional Report
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Panhandle Regional Summary
The Panhandle Region accounts for 21% of the state’s total water demand. The largest demand sector is Crop Irrigation (86%).
Water Resources & Limitations
Surface Water
Surface water is used to meet about 2% of the region’s demand. Basins throughout the region are projected to have surface water supply shortages in the future. The region is supplied by two rivers: the North Canadian River (known in the Panhandle as the Beaver River) and the Cimarron River. Historically, rivers and creeks in the region have had periods of low to no flow during any month of the year due to seasonal and long-term precipitation trends. Irrigation has had a significant effect on the Beaver River’s streamflow, which has decreased substantially since the 1970s. Large reservoirs have been built on the North Canadian River (Canton and Optima Lakes) and on Wolf Creek (Fort Supply Lake) to provide flood control, recreation, and public water supply. Optima Lake regulates flow in the Beaver River at Beaver but does not sustain a water supply yield.
Relative to other regions, surface water quality in the region is considered fair to good. However, multiple rivers, creeks, and lakes, including the Beaver and Cimarron Rivers, are impaired for Agricultural use (Crop Irrigation demand sector) and Public and Private Water Supply (Municipal and Industrial demand sector) due to high levels of total dissolved solids (TDS), salts, and chlorophyll-a. These impairments are scheduled to be addressed through the Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) process, but the use of these supplies may be limited in the interim.
Surface water in the region is fully allocated, limiting diversions to existing permitted amounts.
Alluvial Groundwater
Alluvial groundwater is used to meet 7% of the demand in the region. The majority of currently allocated alluvial groundwater withdrawals in the region are from the North Canadian River aquifer, and to a lesser extent, the Cimarron River aquifer. If alluvial groundwater continues to supply a similar portion of demand in the future, storage depletions from these aquifers are likely to occur throughout the year, although these projected depletions will be minimal relative to the amount of water in storage and permit availability. The largest storage depletions are projected to occur in the summer.
The availability of water rights is not expected to constrain the use of alluvial groundwater supplies to meet local demands through 2060.
Bedrock Groundwater
Bedrock groundwater is used to meet 91% of the demand in the region. Currently allocated and projected withdrawals are primarily from
Synopsis
The Panhandle Watershed Planning Region relies primarily on bedrock groundwater supplies from the Ogallala aquifer.
It is anticipated that water users in the region will continue to rely on the Ogallala and minor aquifers to meet future demand.
Surface water supplies will be typically insufficient to meet demand throughout the Region.
Groundwater storage depletions may lead to higher pumping costs, the need for deeper wells, and potentially, changes to well yields or water quality.
Additional conservation could reduce surface water gaps, alluvial groundwater storage depletions, and bedrock groundwater storage depletions.
Surface water alternatives, such as groundwater supplies and/or developing new small reservoirs, could eliminate gaps without major impacts to groundwater storage.
Three basins (54, 55, and 66) within the region have been identified as “hot spots,” areas where more pronounced water supply availability issues are forecasted. (See “Regional and Statewide Opportunities and Solutions,” OCWP Executive Report.)
Current and Projected Regional Water Demand
Current Water Demand:
390,690 acre-feet/year (21% of state total)
Largest Demand Sector:
Crop Irrigation (86% of regional total)
Current Supply Sources:
2% SW
7% Alluvial GW
91% Bedrock GW
Projected Demand (2060):
473,840 acre-feet/year
Growth (2010-2060):
83,150 acre-feet/year (21%)
Panhandle Region Demand SummaryPanhandle Regional Report 3
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Supply Limitations
Panhandle Region
the Ogallala aquifer, and to a much lesser extent, the El Reno and other non-delineated minor aquifers. The Ogallala has substantial groundwater storage and commonly yields 500 to 1,000 gpm and can yield up to 2,000 gpm in thick, highly permeable areas. Aquifer storage depletions are likely to occur throughout the year, but will be largest in the summer months.
Water Supply Limitations
Surface water limitations were based on physical availability, water supply availability for new permits, and water quality. Groundwater limitations were based on the total size and rate of storage depletions in major aquifers. Groundwater permits are not expected to constrain the use of groundwater through 2060, and insufficient statewide groundwater quality data are available to compare basins based on groundwater quality. Basins with the most significant water supply challenges statewide are indicated by a red box. The remaining basins with surface water gaps or groundwater storage depletions were considered to have potential limitations (yellow). Basins without gaps and storage depletions were considered to have minimal limitations (green). Detailed explanations of each basin’s supplies are provided in individual basin summaries and supporting data and analysis.These depletions are small relative to the amount of water in storage, but are expected to lead to adverse impacts on pumping costs, yields, and/or water quality.
The availability of water rights is not expected to constrain the use of bedrock groundwater supplies to meet local demand through 2060. 4 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Supply Options
To quantify physical surface water gaps and groundwater storage depletions through 2060, use of local supplies was assumed to continue in the current (2010) proportions. The Ogallala aquifer is expected to continue to supply the majority of demand in the region. The development of groundwater supplies should be considered a short-term water supply option. Over time, the Ogallala may no longer be the most cost-effective source of supply as water levels decrease. Basins and users that rely on surface water are projected to have physical surface water supply shortages (gaps) in the future. Alluvial groundwater storage depletions are also projected in the future. Therefore, additional long-term water supplies should be considered.
Water conservation could aid in reducing projected gaps and groundwater storage depletions or delaying the need for additional infrastructure. Moderately expanded conservation activities, primarily from increased sprinkler irrigation efficiency, could reduce gaps and storage depletions. Further reductions could occur from substantially expanded conservation activities. These measures would require a shift from crops with high water demand (e.g., corn for grain and forage crops) to low water demand crops such as sorghum for grain or wheat for grain, along with increased irrigation efficiency and increased public water supplier conservation. Due to extended dry periods and predominant use of groundwater supplies, drought management measures alone will likely be an ineffective water supply option.
New small reservoirs (50 acre-feet (AF) or less of storage) could enhance the dependability of surface water supplies, but are not expected to substantially decrease gaps. The OCWP Reservoir Viability Study, which evaluated the potential for reservoirs throughout the state, identified two potentially viable sites in the Panhandle Watershed Planning Region.
Alternatively, out-of-basin supplies could provide additional supplies to mitigate the region’s storage depletions. However, due to the distance to dependable supplies, this water supply option may not be cost-effective for many users.
The projected growth in surface water and alluvial groundwater use could instead be supplied by the Ogallala aquifer, which would result in minimal increases in projected groundwater storage depletions. However, increased demands would still leave users susceptible to the adverse effects of storage depletions.
Effectiveness of water supply options in each basin in the Panhandle Region. This evaluation was based upon results of physical water supply availability analysis, existing infrastructure, and other basin-specific factors.
Water Supply Option Effectiveness
Panhandle RegionOklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Panhandle Regional Report 5
6 Panhandle Regional Report
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Supply
Physical Water Availability
Surface Water Resources
Surface water has historically been only a small fraction of the supply used to meet demand in the Panhandle Region. The region’s major streams include the upper North Canadian River (known in part of the region as the Beaver River) and the upper Cimarron River. Many streams in this region are characterized by frequent low-flow periods, although periodic flooding events can also occur.
The headwaters of the upper North Canadian River (Beaver River) are found in Texas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma. The mainstem runs the length of the Oklahoma panhandle turning toward the southeast, where it is known as the Beaver River before reaching the confluence of Wolf Creek. Wolf Creek (approximately 90 miles long, 50 miles in Oklahoma) is the only major tributary to the North Canadian/Beaver River within the Panhandle Region. The upper North Canadian River and its tributaries are located in Basins 52, 53, 54, and 55.
The upper Cimarron River originates in New Mexico and runs along the northern border of Oklahoma, winding in and out of Oklahoma, Colorado, and Kansas. The mainstem turns southeast through Oklahoma in the eastern portion of the Panhandle Region. The Cimarron River’s two largest tributaries within the Panhandle Region are Sand Creek (50 miles long) and Buffalo Creek (50 miles).
As important sources of surface water in Oklahoma, reservoirs and lakes help provide dependable water supply storage, especially when streams and rivers experience periods of low seasonal flow or drought.The Upper Cimarron River and its tributaries are located in Basins 65 and 66.
In the Panhandle Region, streamflow is generally intermittent, but has fair to good quality when available. There are three major reservoirs in the Panhandle Region, but only one provides water supply yield to the region. Canton Lake was constructed on the Upper North Canadian River in 1948 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. However, the entire yield of Canton (13,440 AF/year) is allocated to Oklahoma City. Fort Supply Lake, located on the Wolf Creek tributary to the North Canadian River, was built by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in 1942 and provides a relatively small water supply yield to the region (220 AF/year). Optima Lake, built in
Reservoirs
Panhandle Region
Reservoir Name
Primary Basin Number
Reservoir Owner/Operator
Year Built
Purposes1
Normal Pool Storage
Water Supply
Irrigation
Water Quality
Permitted
Withdrawals
Remaining Water Supply Yield to be Permitted
Storage
Yield
Storage
Yield
Storage
Yield
AF
AF
AFY
AF
AFY
AF
AFY
AFY
AFY
Canton
52
USACE
1948
FC, WS, IR
111,310
38,000
16,240
69,000
2,240
0
0
18,480
0
Fort Supply
54
USACE
1942
FC, C
13,900
400
224
0
0
0
0
0
224
Optima
55
USACE
1978
FC, WS, R, FW
129,000
117,650
---
0
0
0
0
0
No Yield
1 The “Purposes” represent the use(s), as authorized by the funding entity or dam owner(s), for the reservoir storage when constructed.
WS = Water Supply, FC = Flood Control, IR = Irrigation, HP = Hydroelectric Power, WQ = Water Quality, C = Conservation, R = Recreation, FW= Fish & Wildlife, CW = Cooling Water, N = Navigation, LF = Low Flow Regulation
No known information is annotated as “---”1978 and operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, regulates flow in the Beaver River at Beaver, Oklahoma, but does not sustain a dependable water supply yield. There are small privately owned lakes in the region that provide water for agricultural water supply and recreation. Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Panhandle Regional Report 7
Major reservoirs in the Panhandle Region include Canton and Fort Supply. Reservoirs may serve multiple purposes, such as water supply, irrigation, recreation, hydropower generation, and flood control. Reservoirs designed for multiple purposes typically possess a specific volume of water storage assigned for each purpose.
Surface Water Resources
Panhandle Region8 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Estimated Annual Streamflow in 2060
Panhandle Region
Streamflow Statistic
Basins
52
53
54
55
65
66
AFY
Average Annual Flow
93,400
57,500
19,300
12,900
45,500
5,600
Minimum Annual Flow
10,200
500
1,300
0
4,700
0
Annual streamflow in 2060 was estimated using historical gaged flow and projections of increased surface water use from 2010 to 2060.
Water Supply Availability Analysis
For OCWP physical water supply availability analysis, water supplies were divided into three categories: surface water, alluvial aquifers, and bedrock aquifers. Physically available surface water refers to water currently in streams, rivers, lakes, and reservoirs.
The range of historical surface water availability, including droughts, is well-represented in the Oklahoma H2O tool by 58 years of monthly streamflow data (1950 to 2007) recorded by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Therefore, measured streamflow, which reflects current natural and human created conditions (runoff, diversions and use of water, and impoundments and reservoirs), is used to represent the physical water that may be available to meet projected demand.
The estimated average and minimum annual streamflow in 2060 were determined based on historic surface water flow measurements and projected baseline 2060 demand (see Water Demand section). The amount of streamflow in 2060 may vary from basin-level values, due to local variations in demands and local availability of supply sources. The estimated surface water supplies include changes in historical streamflow due to increased upstream demand, return flows, and increases in out-of-basin supplies from existing infrastructure. Permitting, water quality, infrastructure, non-consumptive demand, and potential climate change implications are considered in separate OCWP analyses. Past reservoir operations are reflected and accounted for in the measured historical streamflow downstream of a reservoir. For this analysis, streamflow was adjusted to reflect interstate compact provisions in accordance with existing administrative protocol.
The amount of water a reservoir can provide from storage is referred to as its yield. The yield is considered the maximum amount of water a reservoir can dependably supply during critical drought periods. OCWP physical availability analyses considered the unused yield of existing reservoirs. Future potential reservoir storage was considered as a water supply option.
Groundwater supplies are quantified by the amount of water that the aquifer holds (“stored” water) and the rate of aquifer recharge. In Oklahoma, recharge to aquifers is generally from precipitation that falls on the aquifer and percolates to the water table. In some cases, where the altitude of the water table is below the altitude of the stream-water surface, surface water can seep into the aquifer.
For this analysis, alluvial aquifers are defined as aquifers comprised of river alluvium and terrace deposits, occurring along rivers and streams and consisting of unconsolidated deposits of sand, silt, and clay. Alluvial aquifers are generally thinner (less than 200 feet thick) than bedrock aquifers, feature shallow water tables, and are exposed at the land surface, where precipitation can readily percolate to the water table. Alluvial aquifers are considered to be more hydrologically connected with streams than are bedrock aquifers and are therefore treated separately.
Bedrock aquifers consist of consolidated (solid) or partially consolidated rocks, such as sandstone, limestone, dolomite, and gypsum. Most bedrock aquifers in Oklahoma are exposed at land surface, either entirely or in part. Recharge from precipitation is limited in areas where bedrock aquifers are not exposed.
For both alluvial and bedrock aquifers, this analysis was used to predict potential groundwater depletions based on the difference between the groundwater demand and recharge rate. While potential storage depletions do not affect the permit availability of water, it is important to understand the extent of these depletions.
Surface water supplies only about 2% of the demand in the Panhandle Region. While the region’s average physical surface water supply exceeds projected surface water demand in the region, gaps can occur due to seasonal, long-term hydrologic (drought) or localized variability in surface water flows.
Surface Water Flows (1950-2007)
Panhandle RegionOklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Panhandle Regional Report 9
alluvium and 100 and 500 gpm in the terrace deposits. The terrace deposits are overlain by sand dunes. The water is very hard and is classified as calcium magnesium bicarbonate type. Extensive pumping can make this formation susceptible to salt water intrusion. The aquifer underlies a portion of Basin 65.
The only minor aquifer in the region is the El Reno. Minor aquifers may have a substantial amount of water in storage and high recharge rates, but generally low yields of less than 50 gpm per well. Groundwater from minor aquifers is an important source of water for domestic and stock water use for individuals in outlying areas, but may not provide sufficient water for large volume users.in the terrace formations. The water is a very hard calcium bicarbonate type with TDS concentrations of up to 1,000 mg/L. The aquifer underlies portions of Basins 52, 53, 54, and 65.
The Cimarron River alluvial aquifer tends to be silt and clay deposits changing downward to sandy clay, sand, and fine gravel. Maximum thickness reaches 80 feet with well yields ranging between 100 and 200 gpm in the
Groundwater Resources
The Ogallala aquifer, which underlies all but the northeastern portion and the far northwest corner of the Panhandle Watershed Planning Region, is the single largest source of groundwater in Oklahoma. Three major alluvial aquifers, the Canadian River, Cimarron River, and North Canadian River, are located in the eastern portion of the region.
Regionally, the Ogallala aquifer is part of the High Plains aquifer that underlies 174,000 square miles in eight states in the central United States, including about 7,100 square miles in northwestern Oklahoma. The aquifer underlies portions of Basin 52, 53, 54, 55, 65, and 66, and consists predominantly of semi-consolidated sediment layers. The depth to water ranges from less than 10 feet to more than 300 feet below the land surface, and the saturated thickness ranges from nearly zero to almost 430 feet. The Ogallala commonly yields 500 to 1,000 gpm and can yield up to 2,000 gpm in thick, highly permeable areas. Historically, groundwater has been pumped out of the aquifer at rates significantly exceeding recharge, causing declining water levels throughout much of the aquifer. In small areas of Cimarron and Texas Counties, water levels have declined more than 50 to 100 feet. Elsewhere, local water quality has been impaired by high concentrations of nitrate. However, water quality of the aquifer is generally very good.
The North Canadian River alluvial aquifer consists of fine- to coarse-grained sand with minor clay and silt and local lenses of basal gravel overlain by dune sand. Formation thickness generally averages 30 feet in the alluvium and 70 feet in the terrace deposits. Yields range between 300 and 600 gpm in the alluvium and between 100 and 300 gpm
Withdrawing groundwater in quantities exceeding the amount of recharge to the aquifer may result in reduced aquifer storage. Therefore, both storage and recharge were considered in determining groundwater availability.
Areas without delineated aquifers may have groundwater present. However, specific quantities, yields, and water quality in these areas are currently unknown.
Groundwater Resources
Panhandle Region
Aquifer
Portion of Region Overlaying Aquifer
Recharge
Rate
Current Groundwater Rights
Aquifer Storage in Region
Equal Proportionate Share
Groundwater Available for New Permits
Name
Type
Class1
Percent
Inch/Yr
AFY
AF
AFY/Acre
AFY
Canadian River
Alluvial
Major
<1%
2.0
0
12,000
temporary 2.0
12,800
Cimarron River
Alluvial
Major
1%
2.3
10,800
327,000
temporary 2.0
140,100
El Reno
Bedrock
Minor
8%
0.75
4,700
2,555,000
temporary 2.0
978,700
North Canadian River
Alluvial
Major
8%
1.0
90,600
4,346,000
1.0
413,700
Ogallala
Bedrock
Major
65%
0.5
1,423,800
84,371,000
1.4 to 2.0
6,100,600
Non-Delineated Groundwater Source
Alluvial
Minor
10,500
Non-Delineated Groundwater Source
Bedrock
Minor
4,500
1 Bedrock aquifers with typical yields greater than 50 gpm and alluvial aquifers with typical yields greater than 150 gpm are considered major.
Permits to withdraw groundwater from aquifers (groundwater basins) where the maximum annual yield has not been set are “temporary” permits that allocate 2 AFY/acre. The temporary permit allocation is not based on storage, discharge or recharge amounts, but on a legislative (statute) estimate of maximum needs of most landowners to ensure sufficient availability of groundwater in advance of completed and approved aquifer studies. As a result, the estimated amount of Groundwater Available for New Permits may exceed the estimated aquifer storage amount. For aquifers (groundwater basins) where the maximum annual yield has been determined (with initial storage volumes estimated), updated estimates of amounts in storage were calculated based on actual reported use of groundwater instead of simulated usage from all lands.10 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
The Ogallala is the only major bedrock aquifer in the Panhandle Region. Major alluvial aquifers in the region include Canadian River, Cimarron River, and North Canadian River. Major bedrock aquifers are defined as those that have an average water well yield of at least 50 gpm; major alluvial aquifers are those that yield, on average, at least 150 gpm.
Groundwater Resources
Panhandle RegionPanhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 11
Permit Availability
For the OCWP water availability analysis, “permit availability” pertains to the amount of water that could be made available for withdrawals under permits issued in accordance with Oklahoma water law.
There is no surface water available for new permits in any basin in the Panhandle Region, limiting diversions to existing permitted amounts. For groundwater, the EPS has been set for all of the Ogallala aquifer with the exception of that underlying Roger Mills County, which is located in the West Central Watershed Planning Region. In the Panhandle Region, the Ogallala aquifer’s EPS is set at two acre-feet per year (AFY) per acre in the three Panhandle counties and 1.4 AFY per acre for other counties in the Planning Region overlying the Ogallala. The EPS for the North Canadian River and the Canadian River aquifers is set at one AFY per acre. For the Cimarron River and El Reno aquifers, temporary permits are issued, granting users two AFY of water per acre of land until the OWRB conducts hydrologic investigations and establishes the maximum annual yield of the basins. Projections indicate that there will be groundwater available for new permits in all aquifers in the Panhandle Region through 2060.
If water authorized by a stream water right is not put to beneficial use within the specified time, the OWRB may reduce or cancel the unused amount and return the water to the public domain for appropriation to others.
Surface Water Permit Availability
Panhandle Region
Projections indicate that there will be no surface water available for new permits through 2060 in all basins in the Panhandle Region.
Groundwater Permit Availability
Panhandle Region
Projections indicate that there will be groundwater available for new permits through 2060 in all basins in the Panhandle Region.
Water Use Permitting in Oklahoma
Oklahoma stream water laws are based on riparian and prior appropriation doctrines. Riparian rights to a reasonable use of water, in addition to domestic use, are not subject to permitting or oversight by the OWRB. An appropriative right to stream water is based on the prior appropriation doctrine, which is often described as “first in time, first in right.” If a water shortage occurs, the diverter with the older appropriative water right will have first right among other appropriative right holders to divert the available water up to the authorized amount.
The permit availability of surface water is based on the average annual flow in the basin, the amount of water that flows past the proposed diversion point, and existing water uses upstream and downstream in the basin. The permit availability of surface water at the outlet of each basin in the region was estimated through OCWP technical analyses. The current allocated use for each basin is also noted to give an indication of the portion of the average annual streamflow used by existing water right holders. A site-specific analysis is conducted before issuing a permit.
Groundwater permit availability is generally based on the amount of land owned or leased that overlies a specific aquifer (groundwater basin). State law provides for the OWRB to conduct hydrologic investigations of groundwater basins and to determine amounts of water that may be withdrawn. After a hydrologic investigation has been conducted on a groundwater basin, the OWRB determines the maximum annual yield of the basin. Based on the “equal proportionate share”—defined as the portion of the maximum annual yield of water from a groundwater basin that is allocated to each acre of land overlying the basin—regular permits are issued to holders of existing temporary permits and to new permit applicants. Equal proportionate shares have yet to be determined on many aquifers in the state. For those aquifers, “temporary” permits are granted to users allocating two acre-feet of water per acre of land per year. Temporary permits are for one-year terms, which can be revalidated by the permittee each year, subject to conditions prescribed in OWRB rules or in an individual case by the OWRB. When the equal proportionate share and maximum annual yield are approved by the OWRB, all temporary permits overlying the studied basin are converted to regular permits at the new approved allocation rate. As with stream water, a groundwater permit grants only the right to withdraw water; it does not ensure yield.12 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Quality
Water quality of the Panhandle Watershed Planning Region is markedly different across two major river systems, the Cimarron and the Beaver/North Canadian. Although some differences are ecologically based, others are due to irrigation and other agricultural uses. From east to west, the region is contained within three distinct plains ecoregions. The terminus of the region is geographically not in Oklahoma’s Panhandle but encompasses the far northwestern corner of the state. The eastern two-thirds of this portion of the region are part of the Central Great Plains ecoregion. To the west, the region transitions into the Southwestern Tablelands ecoregion. A portion of the ecoregion also covers the far northwestern tip of the Panhandle. Finally, the remainder of the region is covered by the High Plains ecoregion, portions of which are intermixed with the Southwestern Tablelands.
Water quality of the Central Great Plains is exemplified by sites along the Beaver/North Canadian River at Fort Supply, Woodward, and Seiling, as well as the Cimarron River near Buffalo. The North Canadian River also drains into Canton Reservoir, at the east end of the region. Nutrient concentrations are typical mean phosphorus concentrations ranging from 0.05 parts per million (ppm) along the Beaver River to 0.12 ppm on the North Canadian near Woodward. From the middle to lower end, as well as at Canton Reservoir, waters are considered eutrophic, but are mesotrophic along the Beaver River. Waters are phosphorus-limited. Water clarity is high in both the Cimarron and Beaver Rivers with average turbidity values ranging from 5 to 10 nephelometric turbidity units (NTUs). Clarity diminishes in the North Canadian River as turbidity averages increase to 15-25 NTU, but is still relatively low for the ecoregion. Clarity is considered good to fair in Canton with an average Secchi depth of 1.2 feet. The most divergent water quality indicator is conductivity. Along the Beaver/North Canadian Rivers and into Canton Reservoir, moderately to highly saline water is present, much like the rest of the Central Great Plains. Median conductivity values range from 1400-1570 microsiemens (μS). However, along the Cimarron River and tributaries, median conductivity values increase to more than 14,000 μS, and from Freedom to Waynoka are more than 150,000 μS. Freshwater ecological diversity is relatively diverse throughout the Beaver/North Canadian River watersheds and highly diverse in the Gypsum Hills and other areas with higher gradients and gravel/cobble substrates. However, due to high salinity, the majority of the upper Cimarron River has relatively low aquatic diversity with fewer than 8-10 fish species. The extremely highly saline areas of the watershed have only two species of fish.
The Panhandle Region is comprised of several distinct ecoregions, as evidenced by its diverse geology and water quality, which ranges from excellent to poor.
Ecoregions
Panhandle Region
Lake Trophic Status
A lake’s trophic state, essentially a measure of its biological productivity, is a major determinant of water quality.
Oligotrophic: Low primary productivity and/or low nutrient levels.
Mesotrophic: Moderate primary productivity with moderate nutrient levels.
Eutrophic: High primary productivity and nutrient rich.
Hypereutrophic: Excessive primary productivity and excessive nutrients.Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 13
The Southwestern Tablelands ecoregion is underlain by the Ogallala Aquifer. The area has numerous springs and has historically supported a variety of ecosystems in lowland areas. Extensive irrigation, however, has diminished groundwater levels somewhat with a distinctive effect on streams and springs. Many perennial streams are ephemeral, including considerable stretches of the Cimarron and Beaver Rivers.
Water quality can be characterized by the Cimarron River to the north, Beaver River through the central part of the ecoregion, and Wolf Creek near Fort Supply and Fort Supply Reservoir. The Beaver River and Wolf Creek have comparatively low nutrient concentrations with phosphorus values ranging from 0.05 to 0.06 ppm, and could be classified as mesotrophic. Total nitrogen concentrations range from 0.15 ppm along the Beaver River to near 0.64 ppm on Wolf Creek. Conversely, the Cimarron River has moderately high nutrient concentrations with total phosphorus and nitrogen averages greater than 0.50 and 1.43 ppm, respectively, and is considered hypereutrophic. Fort Supply Reservoir is co-limited for total phosphorus and nitrogen and is considered eutrophic. Water clarity is good throughout the area with turbidity averages from 11 NTU at Beaver to 21 NTU at Mocane. Fort Supply Reservoir has an average Secchi depth of 25 cm. However, as with the Central Great Plains, salinity is widely variable throughout the ecoregion. On the Beaver River near Guymon, average conductivity is less than 500 μS, which is extremely low for the western plains. Similar conductivity values have been recorded along other spring-fed reaches of the Southwestern Tablelands. Wolf Creek and Fort Supply Reservoir have average conductivity values ranging from 930-1000 μS. Conversely, at the Beaver station, average conductivity is
Water Quality Standards and Implementation
The Oklahoma Water Quality Standards (OWQS) are the cornerstone of the state’s water quality management programs. They are a set of rules promulgated under the federal Clean Water Act and state statutes to maintain and protect the quality of state waters. The OWQS designate beneficial uses for streams, lakes and other bodies of surface water, and for groundwater that has a mean concentration of Total Dissolved Solids of 10,000 milligrams per liter or less. Beneficial uses are the activities for which a waterbody can be used based on physical, chemical, and biological characteristics as well as geographic setting, scenic quality, and economic considerations. Beneficial uses include such categories as Fish and Wildlife Propagation, Public and Private Water Supply, Primary (or Secondary) Body Contact Recreation, Agriculture, and Aesthetics. The OWQS also contain standards for maintaining and protecting these uses. The purpose of the OWQS is to promote and protect as many beneficial uses as are attainable and to assure that degradation of existing quality of waters of the state does not occur.
The OWQS are applicable to all activities which may affect the water quality of waters of the state, and are to be utilized by all state environmental agencies in implementing their programs to protect water quality. Some examples of these implementation programs are: permits for point source (e.g. municipal and industrial) discharges into waters of the state; authorizations for waste disposal from concentrated animal feeding operations; regulation of runoff from nonpoint sources; and corrective actions to clean up polluted waters.
BUMP monitoring sites and streams with TMDL studies completed or underway.
Water Quality Standards Implementation
Panhandle Region14 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Quality Impairments
A waterbody is considered to be impaired when its quality does not meet the standards prescribed for its beneficial uses. For example, impairment of the Public and Private Water Supply beneficial use means the use of the waterbody as a drinking water supply is hindered. Impairment of the Agricultural use means the use of the waterbody for livestock watering, irrigation or other agricultural uses is hindered. Impairments can exist for other uses such as Fish and Wildlife Propagation or Recreation.
The Beneficial Use Monitoring Program (BUMP), established in 1998 to document and quantify impairments of assigned beneficial uses of the state’s lakes and streams, provides information for supporting and updating the OWQS and prioritizing pollution control programs. A set of rules known as “use support assessment protocols” is also used to determine whether beneficial uses of waterbodies are being supported.
In an individual waterbody, after impairments have been identified, a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) study is conducted to establish the sources of impairments—whether from point sources (discharges) or non-point sources (runoff). The study will then determine the amount of reduction necessary to meet the applicable water quality standards in that waterbody and allocate loads among the various contributors of pollution.
For more detailed review of the state’s water quality conditions, see the most recent versions of the OWRB’s BUMP Report, and the Oklahoma Integrated Water Quality Assessment Report, a comprehensive assessment of water quality in Oklahoma’s streams and lakes required by the federal Clean Water Act and developed by the ODEQ.
Water Quality Impairments
Panhandle Region
Regional water quality impairments based on the 2008 Integrated Water Quality Assessment Report. Surface water impairments in this region have occurred due to alterations of stream flow.Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 15
8100 μS, which is extremely saline and more characteristic of the Cimarron River. The Mocane site is also highly saline with an average conductivity of 4300 μS.
The northwestern tip of the Panhandle is encompassed by the diverse Mesa de Maya/Black Mesa ecoregion. Many streams are spring-fed and ephemeral and the Cimarron River is of much higher quality in this area. Although many streams have good water clarity, Lake Carl Etling is fair with an average Secchi depth of 0.75 feet. Nutrient values are relatively high in the lake with total phosphorus ranging from 0.12 to 0.29 ppm and total nitrogen from 2.31 to 4.51 ppm. It is also considered hyper-eutrophic. Conductivity is relatively high at an average of 2,000 μS, and closely resembles the upper portion of the North Canadian River.
The High Plains ecoregion in the OCWP Panhandle Region is mostly comprised of the Canadian/Cimarron High Plains, but is bordered on the northern and western edges by the Rolling Sand Plains and Moderate Relief Plains. Many streams and rivers are naturally ephemeral and little is known about surface water quality. Streams that may have been naturally perennial have become ephemeral as irrigation practices have exacerbated natural precipitation/evaporation issues. Also, many streams are shallow with low banks and very little native habitat for fish. The area does contain numerous playa lakes, which support native wetlands for waterfowl.
Although a statewide groundwater water quality program does not exist in Oklahoma, various aquifer studies have been completed and data are available from municipal and other sources. The Panhandle Region is underlain by the Ogallala aquifer. Most groundwater is used to irrigate crops, with the remainder used for livestock, municipal, and domestic needs. Water quality of the aquifer is generally very good. In some local areas, quality has been impaired by high concentrations of nitrate. Some deep portions of the aquifer have elevated concentrations of calcium, chloride, sodium, and sulfate, derived from upward movement of mineralized water from underlying Permian formations. Water from the Panhandle portion of the Ogallala is of a calcium-magnesium chloride-sulfate type and, although hard, is suitable for public supply. Excessive concentrations of chloride, sulfate and fluoride do make the water unsuitable in some areas. The Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) has identified a local well field with elevated nitrate levels; additional wells showed elevated levels of selenium, probably of natural origin.
The Panhandle region is also underlain by several alluvial aquifers and terrace deposits. In northwest Oklahoma, water quality in alluvium and terrace deposits is affected by adjacent streams. The quality is generally poor where the deposits directly overlie the Ogallala and are not in contact with Permian red beds.
Surface Waters with Designated Beneficial Use
for Public/Private Water Supply
Panhandle Region
Surface Waters with Designated Beneficial Use for Agriculture
Panhandle Region16 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Surface Water Protection
The Oklahoma Water Quality Standards (OWQS) provide protection for surface waters in many ways.
Appendix B Areas are designated in the OWQS as containing waters of recreational and/or ecological significance. Discharges to waterbodies may be limited in these areas.
Source Water Protection Areas are derived from the state’s Source Water Protection Program, which analyzes existing and potential threats to the quality of public drinking water in Oklahoma.
The High Quality Waters designation in the OWQS refers to waters that exhibit water quality exceeding levels necessary to support the propagation of fishes, shellfishes, wildlife, and recreation in and on the water. This designation prohibits any new point source discharges or additional load or increased concentration of specified pollutants.
The Sensitive Water Supplies (SWS) designation applies to public and private water supplies possessing conditions making them more susceptible to pollution events, thus requiring additional protection. This designation restricts point source discharges in the watershed and institutes a 10 μg/L (micrograms per liter) chlorophyll-a criterion to protect against taste and odor problems and reduce water treatment costs.
Outstanding Resource Waters are those constituting outstanding resources or of exceptional recreational and/or ecological significance. This designation prohibits any new point source discharges or additional load or increased concentration of specified pollutants.
Waters designated as Scenic Rivers in Appendix A of the OWQS are protected through restrictions on point source discharges in the watershed. A 0.037 mg/L total phosphorus criterion is applied to all Scenic Rivers in Oklahoma.
Nutrient Limited Watersheds are those containing a waterbody with a designated beneficial use that is adversely affected by excess nutrients.
Surface Water Protection Areas
Panhandle Region
Special OWQS provisions in place to protect surface waters. The watersheds of Lake Carl Etling and Ft. Supply have been identified by OWRB as Nutrient Limited Watersheds but currently lack protection to prevent degradation.Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 17
Groundwater Protection
The Oklahoma Water Quality Standards (OWQS) sets the criteria for protection of groundwater quality as follows:
“If the concentration found in the test sample exceeds [detection limit], or if other substances in the groundwater are found in concentrations greater than those found in background conditions, that groundwater shall be deemed to be polluted and corrective action may be required.”
Wellhead Protection Areas are established by the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) to improve drinking water quality through the protection of groundwater supplies. The primary goal is to minimize the risk of pollution by limiting potential pollution-related activities on land around public water supplies.
Oil and Gas Production Special Requirement Areas, enacted to protect groundwater and/or surface water, can consist of specially lined drilling mud pits (to prevent leaks and spills) or tanks whose contents are removed upon completion of drilling activities; well set-back distances from streams and lakes; restrictions on fluids and chemicals; or other related protective measures.
Nutrient-Vulnerable Groundwater is a designation given to certain hydrogeologic basins that are designated by the OWRB as having high or very high vulnerability to contamination from surface sources of pollution. This designation can impact land application of manure for regulated agriculture facilities.
Appendix H Limited Areas of Groundwater are localized areas where quality is unsuitable for default beneficial uses due to natural conditions or irreversible human-induced pollution.
NOTE: Although the State of Oklahoma has a mature and successful surface water quality monitoring program, no comprehensive approach or plan to monitor the quality of the state’s groundwater resources has been developed.
Various types of protection are in place to prevent degradation of groundwater and levels of vulnerability. The North Canadian and Cimarron alluvial aquifers have been identified by the OWRB as very highly vulnerable but currently lack protection to prevent degradation.
Groundwater Protection Areas
Panhandle Region18 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Quality Trends Study
As part of the 2012 OCWP Update, OWRB monitoring staff compiled more than ten years of Beneficial Use Monitoring Program (BUMP) data and other resources to initiate an ongoing statewide comprehensive analysis of surface water quality trends. Five parameters were selected for OCWP watershed planning region analysis—chlorophyll-a, conductivity, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and turbidity.
Reservoir Trends: Water quality trends for reservoirs were analyzed for chlorophyll-a, conductivity, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and turbidity at sixty-five (65) reservoirs across the state. Data sets were of various lengths, depending on the station’s period of record. The direction and magnitude of trends varies throughout the state and within regions. However, when considered statewide, the final trend analysis revealed several notable details.
Chlorophyll-a and nutrient concentrations continue to increase at a number • of lakes. The proportions of lakes exhibiting a significant upward trend were 42% for chlorophyll-a, 45% for total nitrogen, and 12% for total phosphorus.
Likewise, conductivity and turbidity have trended upward over time. Nearly • 28% of lakes show a significant upward trend in turbidity, while nearly 45% demonstrate a significant upward trend for conductivity.
Stream Trends: Water quality trends for streams were analyzed for conductivity, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and turbidity at sixty (60) river stations across the state. Data sets were of various lengths, depending on the station’s period of record, but generally, data were divided into historical and recent datasets, and analyzed separately and as a whole. The direction and magnitude of trends varies throughout the state and within regions. However, when considered statewide, the final trend analysis revealed several notable details.
Total nitrogen and phosphorus are very different when comparing period of • record to more recent data. When considering the entire period of record, approximately 80% of stations showed a downward trend in nutrients. However, if only the most recent data (approximately 10 years) are considered, the percentage of stations with a downward trend decreases to 13% for nitrogen and 30% for phosphorus. The drop is accounted for in stations with either significant upward trends or no detectable trend.
Likewise, general turbidity trends have changed over time. Over the entire • period of record, approximately 60% of stations demonstrated a significant upward trend. However, more recently, that proportion has dropped to less than 10%.
Similarly, general conductivity trends have changed over time, albeit less • dramatically. Over the entire period of record, approximately 45% of stations demonstrated a significant upward trend. However, more recently, that proportion has dropped to less than 30%.
Typical Impact of Trends Study Parameters
Chlorophyll-a is a measure of algae growth. When algae growth increases, there is an increased likelihood of taste and odor problems in drinking water as well as aesthetic issues.
Conductivity is a measure of the ability of water to pass electrical current. In water, conductivity is affected by the presence of inorganic dissolved solids, such as chloride, nitrate, sulfate, and phosphate anions (ions that carry a negative charge) or sodium, magnesium, calcium, iron, and aluminum cations (ions that carry a positive charge). Conductivity in streams and rivers is heavily dependent upon regional geology and discharges. High specific conductance indicates high concentrations of dissolved solids, which can affect the suitability of water for domestic, industrial, agricultural and other uses. At higher conductivity levels, drinking water may have an unpleasant taste or odor or may even cause gastrointestinal distress. High concentration may also cause deterioration of plumbing fixtures and appliances. Relatively expensive water treatment processes, such as reverse osmosis, are required to remove excessive dissolved solids from water. Concerning agriculture, most crops cannot survive if the salinity of the water is too high.
Total Nitrogen is a measure of all dissolved and suspended nitrogen in a water sample. It includes kjeldahl nitrogen (ammonia + organic), nitrate and nitrite nitrogen. It is naturally abundant in the environment and is a key element necessary for growth of plants and animals. Excess nitrogen from polluting sources can lead to significant water quality problems, including harmful algal blooms, hypoxia and declines in wildlife and its habitat.
Phosphorus is one of the key elements necessary for growth of plants and animals. Excess nitrogen and phosphorus lead to significant water quality problems, including harmful algal blooms, hypoxia, and declines in wildlife and its habitat. Increases in total phosphorus can lead to excessive growth of algae, which can increase taste and odor problems in drinking water as well as increased costs for treatment.
Turbidity refers to the clarity of water. The greater the amount of total suspended solids (TSS) in the water, the murkier it appears and the higher the measured turbidity. Increases in turbidity can increase treatment costs and have negative effects on aquatic communities by reducing light penetration.Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 19
Stream Water Quality Trends
Panhandle Region
Site
Beaver River
near Beaver
Cimarron River
near Buffalo
Cimarron River
near Mocane
North Canadian River near Seiling
North Canadian River near Woodward
Parameter
All Data Trend
(1961-1994, 1998-2009)1
Recent Trend (1998-2009)
All Data Trend
(1968-1994, 1998-2009)1
Recent Trend (1998-2009)
All Data Trend (1999-2009)1
Recent Trend (1999-2009)
All Data Trend
(1967-1993, 1998-2009)1
Recent Trend (1998-2009)
All Data Trend
(1960-1995, 1998-2009)1
Recent Trend (2000-2009)
Conductivity (μS/cm)
Total Nitrogen (mg/L)
NT
NT
NT
Total Phosphorus (mg/L)
NT
NT
NT
Turbidity (NTU)
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
NT
Increasing Trend Decreasing Trend NT = No significant trend detectedTrend magnitude and statistical confidence levels vary for each site. Site-specific information can be obtained from the OWRB Water Quality Division.
1 Date ranges for analyzed data represent the earliest site visit date for at least one parameter yet may not be inclusive of all parameters.
Notable concerns in the Panhandle Region are:
Significant upward trend for conductivity on the Beaver and Cimarron Rivers•
Significant upward trend for total nitrogen throughout region•
Lake Water Quality Trends
Panhandle Region
Site
Canton Lake
Parameter
(1995-2009)
Chlorophyll-a (mg/m3)
Conductivity (μS/cm)
NT
Total Nitrogen (mg/L)
Total Phosphorus (mg/L)
NT
Turbidity (NTU)
Increasing Trend Decreasing Trend NT = No significant trend detectedTrend magnitude and statistical confidence levels vary for each site. Site-specific information can be obtained from the OWRB Water Quality Division.
A notable concern in the Panhandle Region is:
Significant upward trend for total nitrogen and turbidity at Canton Reservoir• 20 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Demand
The Panhandle Region’s water needs account for about 21% of the total statewide demand. Regional demand will increase by 21% (83,000 AFY) from 2010 to 2060. The majority of the demand and growth in demand over this period will be in the Crop Irrigation sector.
Crop Irrigation is expected to remain the largest demand sector in the region, accounting for 82% of the total regional demand in 2060. Currently, 6% of the demand from this sector is supplied by surface water, 19% by alluvial groundwater, and 75% by bedrock groundwater. Predominant irrigated crops in the Panhandle Region include corn, pasture grasses, and wheat.
Self Supplied Industrial demand is projected to account for approximately 5% of the 2060 demand. Currently, 33% of the demand from this sector is supplied by alluvial groundwater and 67% by bedrock groundwater.
Municipal and Industrial demand in the Panhandle Region is projected to account for approximately 4% of the 2060 demand. Currently, 5% of the demand from this sector is supplied by surface water, 24% by alluvial groundwater, and 71% by bedrock groundwater.
Livestock demand is projected to account for 4% of the 2060 demand. Currently, 2% of the demand from this sector is supplied by surface water, 10% by alluvial groundwater, and 88% by bedrock groundwater. Livestock use in the region is predominantly for beef cow and hog production. However, beef production is projected to drive the increases in livestock water demand.
Oil and Gas demand is projected to account for approximately 3% of the 2060 demand. Currently, 32% of the demand from this sector is supplied by surface water, 7% by alluvial groundwater, and 61% by bedrock groundwater.
Self Supplied Residential demand is projected to account for approximately 1% of the 2060 demand. Currently, 37% of the demand from this sector is supplied by alluvial groundwater and 63% by bedrock groundwater.
Thermoelectric Power demand is projected to account for less than 1% of the 2060 demand. The Western Farmers Electric Coop, which is supplied by alluvial groundwater, is a large user of water for thermoelectric power generation in Basin 52.
Total 2060 Water Demand by Sector and Basin
(Percent of Total Basin Demand)
Panhandle Region
Projected water demand by sector. Crop Irrigation is expected to remain the largest demand sector in the region, accounting for 82% of the total regional demand in 2060.
Population and demand projection data developed specifically for OCWP analyses focus on retail customers for whom the system provides direct service. These estimates were generated from Oklahoma Department of Commerce population projections. In addition, the 2008 OCWP Provider Survey contributed critical information on water production and population serviced that was used to calculate per capita water use. Population for 2010 was estimated and may not reflect actual 2010 Census values. Exceptions to this methodology are noted.Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 21
Supply Sources Used to Meet
Current Demand (2010)
Panhandle Region
The Panhandle Region’s water needs account for about 21% of the total statewide demand. Regional demand will increase by 21% (83,150 AFY) from 2010 to 2060. The majority of the demand and growth in demand over this period will be in the Crop Irrigation sector.
Total Water Demand
by Sector
Panhandle Region
Water Demand
Water demand refers to the amount of water required to meet the needs of people, communities, industry, agriculture, and other users. Growth in water demand frequently corresponds to growth in population, agriculture, industry, or related economic activity. Demands have been projected from 2010 to 2060 in ten-year increments for seven distinct consumptive water demand sectors.
Water Demand Sectors
nThermoelectric Power: Thermoelectric power producing plants, using both self-supplied water and municipal-supplied water, are included in the thermoelectric power sector.
n Self Supplied Residential: Households on private wells that are not connected to a public water supply system are included in the SSR sector.
n Self Supplied Industrial: Demands from large industries that do not directly depend upon a public water supply system. Water use data and employment counts were included in this sector, when available.
n Oil and Gas: Oil and gas drilling and exploration activities, excluding water used at oil and gas refineries (typically categorized as Self-Supplied Industrial users), are included in the oil and gas sector.
n Municipal and Industrial: These demands represent water that is provided by public water systems to homes, businesses, and industries throughout Oklahoma, excluding water supplied to thermoelectric power plants.
n Livestock: Livestock demands were evaluated by livestock group (beef, poultry, etc.) based on the 2007 Agriculture Census.
n Crop Irrigation: Water demands for crop irrigation were estimated using the 2007 Agriculture Census data for irrigated acres by crop type and county. Crop irrigation requirements were obtained primarily from the Natural Resource Conservation Service Irrigation Guide Reports.
OCWP demands were not projected for non-consumptive or instream water uses, such as hydroelectric power generation, fish and wildlife, recreation and instream flow maintenance. Projections, which were augmented through user/stakeholder input, are based on standard methods using data specific to each sector and OCWP planning basin.
Projections were initially developed for each county in the state, then allocated to each of the 82 basins. To provide regional context, demands were aggregated by Watershed Planning Region. Water shortages were calculated at the basin level to more accurately determine areas where shortages may occur. Therefore, gaps, depletions, and options are presented in detail in the Basin Summaries and subsequent sections. Future demand projections were developed independent of available supply, water quality, or infrastructure considerations. The impacts of climate change, increased water use efficiency, conservation, and non-consumptive uses, such as hydropower, are presented in supplemental OCWP reports.
Present and future demands were applied to supply source categories to facilitate an evaluation of potential surface water gaps and alluvial and bedrock aquifer storage depletions at the basin level. For this baseline analysis, the proportion of each supply source used to meet future demands for each sector was held constant at the proportion established through current, active water use permit allocations. For example, if the crop irrigation sector in a basin currently uses 80% bedrock groundwater, then 80% of the projected future crop irrigation demand is assumed to use bedrock groundwater. Existing out-of-basin supplies are represented as surface water supplies in the receiving basin.
Total Water Demand by Sector
Panhandle Region
Planning Horizon
Crop Irrigation
Livestock
Municipal & Industrial
Oil & Gas
Self Supplied Industrial
Self Supplied Residential
Thermoelectric Power
Total
AFY
2010
336,890
19,010
14,050
3,350
14,470
2,390
530
390,690
2020
347,680
19,220
15,180
5,150
14,490
2,540
590
404,860
2030
358,480
19,430
16,330
7,370
16,280
2,670
660
421,220
2040
369,270
19,640
17,390
10,020
18,400
2,780
740
438,250
2050
377,550
19,860
18,540
13,090
20,600
2,910
820
453,370
2060
390,860
20,070
19,630
16,580
22,740
3,030
920
473,84022 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Public Water Providers
Public Water Providers
Panhandle Region
There are more than 1,600 Oklahoma water systems permitted or regulated by the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ); 785 systems were analyzed in detail for the 2012 OCWP Update. The public systems selected for inclusion, which collectively supply approximately 94 percent of the state’s current population, consist of municipal or community water systems and rural water districts that were readily identifiable as non-profit, local governmental entities. This and other information provided in the OCWP will support provider-level planning by providing insight into future supply and infrastructure needs.
The Panhandle Region includes 32 of the 785 public supply systems analyzed for the 2012 OCWP Update. The Public Water Providers map indicates the approximate service areas of these systems. (The map may not accurately represent existing service areas or legal boundaries. In addition, water systems often serve multiple counties and can extend into multiple planning basins and regions.)
In terms of 2010 population served (excluding provider-to-provider sales), the five largest systems in the region, in decreasing order, are Woodward, Guymon, Hooker, Beaver, and Goodwell. These five systems provide service for more than 70 percent of the population served by public water providers in the region.
Demands upon public water systems, which comprise the majority of the OCWP’s Municipal and Industrial (M&I) water demand sector, were analyzed at both the basin and provider level. Retail demand projections detailed in the Public Water Provider Demand Forecast table were developed for each of the OCWP providers in the region. These projections include estimated system losses, defined as water lost either during water production or distribution to residential homes and businesses. Retail demands do not include wholesaled water.
OCWP provider demand forecasts are not intended to supersede water demand forecasts developed by individual providers. OCWP analyses were made using a consistent methodology based on accepted data available on a statewide basis. Where available, provider-generated forecasts were also reviewed as part of this effort.Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 23
Public Water Providers/Retail Population Served
Panhandle Region
Provider
SDWIS ID1
County
Retail Per Capita (GPD)2
Projected Population Served
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
BEAVER
OK2000404
Beaver
252
1,593
1,623
1,654
1,684
1,704
1,734
BEAVER CO RWD #1 TURPIN
OK2000402
Beaver
147
480
488
496
503
511
519
BEAVER CO RWD #2 (GATE)
OK2000405
Beaver
140
100
100
109
109
109
118
BOISE CITY PWA
OK2001303
Cimarron
339
1,239
1,313
1,354
1,354
1,395
1,428
BUFFALO
OK2003003
Harper
188
1,182
1,182
1,182
1,182
1,212
1,212
DEWEY CO RWD #3
OK2007707
Woodward
88
693
722
744
759
776
790
FARGO
OK2002303
Ellis
147
294
294
294
284
284
294
FORGAN
OK2000406
Beaver
80
496
496
505
514
523
532
FORT SUPPLY PWA
OK3007701
Woodward
322
334
344
363
373
383
383
FREEDOM
OK3007601
Woods
74
271
271
281
281
291
291
GAGE
OK2002301
Ellis
186
423
412
412
402
402
412
GOODWELL
OK2007005
Texas
125
1,287
1,601
1,914
2,228
2,549
2,863
GUYMON
OK2007003
Texas
391
14,531
18,063
21,659
25,254
28,839
32,382
HARDESTY UTILITIES
OK2007004
Texas
162
243
304
365
426
486
547
HARPER CO WATER CORP
OK2003001
Harper
280
201
201
201
201
206
206
HOOKER
OK2007006
Texas
278
1,939
2,412
2,892
3,373
3,854
4,326
KEYES UTILITY AUTH
OK2001302
Cimarron
286
315
330
345
345
353
368
LAVERNE
OK2003002
Harper
381
1,081
1,081
1,081
1,081
1,112
1,112
MOORELAND
OK2007709
Woodward
244
1,242
1,300
1,340
1,369
1,398
1,428
OPTIMA
OK2007001
Texas
53
403
495
598
702
794
897
QUINLAN COMMUNITY RWD #1
OK2007708
Woodward
278
188
196
202
206
211
215
SEILING
OK2002205
Dewey
186
875
854
854
854
875
896
SHARON UTILITIES
OK2007741
Woodward
197
131
131
141
141
151
151
SHATTUCK
OK2002304
Ellis
290
1,224
1,194
1,194
1,163
1,163
1,194
TEXAS COUNTY RWD #1
OK2007010
Texas
148
269
335
401
468
534
600
TEXHOMA
OK2007009
Texas
253
1,005
1,252
1,500
1,747
1,994
2,241
TYRONE
OK2007013
Texas
267
945
1,175
1,414
1,652
1,882
2,112
WAYNOKA
OK2007604
Woods
120
1,005
1,005
1,015
1,025
1,035
1,055
WOODS CO RWD #2
OK3007603
Woods
65
42
42
43
43
44
44
WOODWARD
OK2007701
Woodward
347
15,193
15,822
16,303
16,624
17,019
17,328
WOODWARD CO RWD #1
OK2007706
Woodward
159
380
396
408
416
426
433
WOODWARD CO RWD #2
OK2007710
Woodward
288
829
863
889
907
929
945
1 SDWIS - Safe Drinking Water Information System
2 RED ENTRY indicates data were taken from 2007 OWRB Water Rights Database. GPD=gallons per day.24 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Projections of Retail Water Demand
Each public water supply system has a “retail” demand, defined as the amount of water used by residential and non-residential customers within that provider’s service area. Public-supplied residential demand includes water provided to households for domestic uses both inside and outside the home. Non-residential demand includes customer uses at office buildings, shopping centers, industrial parks, schools, churches, hotels, and related locations served by a public water supply system. Retail demand doesn’t include wholesale water to other providers.
Municipal and Industrial (M&I) demand is driven by projected population growth and specific customer characteristics. Demand forecasts for each public system are estimated from average water use (in gallons per capita per day) multiplied by projected population. Oklahoma Department of Commerce 2002 population projections (unpublished special tabulation for the OWRB) were calibrated to 2007 Census estimates and used to establish population growth rates for cities, towns, and rural areas through 2060. Population growth rates were applied to 2007 population-served values for each provider to project future years’ service area (retail) populations.
The main source of data for per capita water use for each provider was the 2008 OCWP Provider Survey conducted by the OWRB in cooperation with the Oklahoma Rural Water Association and Oklahoma Municipal League. For each responding provider, data from the survey included population served, annual average daily demand, total water produced, wholesale purchases and sales between providers, and estimated system losses.
For missing or incomplete data, the weighted average per capita demand was used for the provider’s county. In some cases, provider survey data were supplemented with data from the OWRB water rights database. Per capita supplier demands can vary over time due to precipitation and service area characteristics, such as commercial and industrial activity, tourism, or conservation measures. For the baseline demand projections described here, the per capita demand was held constant through each of the future planning year scenarios. OCWP estimates of potential reductions in demand from conservation measures are analyzed on a basin and regional level, but not for individual provider systems.
Public Water Provider Demand Forecast
Panhandle Region
Provider
SDWIS ID1
County
Demand (AFY)
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
BEAVER
OK2000404
Beaver
450
459
467
476
481
490
BEAVER CO RWD #1 TURPIN
OK2000402
Beaver
79
80
82
83
84
86
BEAVER CO RWD #2 (GATE)
OK2000405
Beaver
16
16
17
17
17
19
BOISE CITY PWA
OK2001303
Cimarron
470
499
514
514
530
542
BUFFALO
OK2003003
Harper
248
248
248
248
255
255
DEWEY CO RWD #3
OK2007707
Woodward
68
71
73
75
76
78
FARGO
OK2002303
Ellis
48
48
48
47
47
48
FORGAN
OK2000406
Beaver
44
44
45
46
47
48
FORT SUPPLY PWA
OK3007701
Woodward
120
124
131
135
138
138
FREEDOM
OK3007601
Woods
22
22
23
23
24
24
GAGE
OK2002301
Ellis
88
86
86
84
84
86
GOODWELL
OK2007005
Texas
181
224
268
312
358
402
GUYMON
OK2007003
Texas
6,366
7,913
9,489
11,064
12,634
14,186
HARDESTY UTILITIES
OK2007004
Texas
44
55
66
77
88
99
HARPER CO WATER CORP
OK2003001
Harper
63
63
63
63
65
65
HOOKER
OK2007006
Texas
603
750
900
1,049
1,199
1,346
KEYES UTILITY AUTH
OK2001302
Cimarron
101
106
110
110
113
118
LAVERNE
OK2003002
Harper
461
461
461
461
475
475
MOORELAND
OK2007709
Woodward
339
355
366
374
382
390
OPTIMA
OK2007001
Texas
24
30
36
42
47
54
QUINLAN COMMUNITY RWD #1
OK2007708
Woodward
59
61
63
64
66
67
SEILING
OK2002205
Dewey
183
178
178
178
183
187
SHARON UTILITIES
OK2007741
Woodward
29
29
31
31
33
33
SHATTUCK
OK2002304
Ellis
397
387
387
377
377
387
TEXAS COUNTY RWD #1
OK2007010
Texas
45
55
66
78
89
99
TEXHOMA
OK2007009
Texas
285
355
425
495
566
636
TYRONE
OK2007013
Texas
282
351
422
494
562
631
WAYNOKA
OK2007604
Woods
135
135
136
138
139
142
WOODS CO RWD #2
OK3007603
Woods
3
3
3
3
3
3
WOODWARD
OK2007701
Woodward
5,900
6,144
6,331
6,455
6,609
6,729
WOODWARD CO RWD #1
OK2007706
Woodward
68
70
72
74
76
77
WOODWARD CO RWD #2
OK2007710
Woodward
268
279
287
293
300
305
1 SDWIS - Safe Drinking Water Information SystemPanhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 25
Wholesale Water Transfers
Some providers sell water on a “wholesale” basis to other providers, effectively increasing the amount of water that the selling provider must deliver and reducing the amount that the purchasing provider diverts from surface and groundwater sources. Wholesale water transfers between public water providers are fairly common and can provide an economical way to meet demand. Wholesale quantities typically vary from year to year depending upon growth, precipitation, emergency conditions, and agreements between systems.
Water transfers between providers can help alleviate costs associated with developing or maintaining infrastructure, such as a reservoir or pipeline; allow access to higher quality or more reliable sources; or provide additional supplies only when required, such as in cases of supply emergencies. Utilizing the 2008 OCWP Provider Survey and OWRB water rights data, the Wholesale Water Transfers table presents a summary of known wholesale arrangements for providers in the region. Transfers can consist of treated or raw water and can occur on a regular basis or only during emergencies. Providers commonly sell to and purchase from multiple water providers.
Wholesale Water Transfers (2010)
Panhandle Region
Provider
SDWIS ID1
Sales
Purchases
Sells To
Emergency or Ongoing
Treated or Raw or Both
Purchases from
Emergency or Ongoing
Treated or Raw or Both
BUFFALO
OK2003003
Harper Co Water Corp
O
T
FORT SUPPLY PWA
OK3007701
City of Woodward
O
T
FREEDOM
OK3007601
Woodward RWD #1
O
T
HARPER CO WATER CORP
OK2003001
Town of Buffalo
O
T
WAYNOKA
OK2007604
Woods County RWD #3
O
T
WOODWARD
OK2007701
Ft Supply PWA
O
T
WOODWARD CO RWD #1
OK2007706
Town of Freedom
O
T
1 SDWIS - Safe Drinking Water Information System26 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Provider Water Rights
Public water providers using surface water or groundwater obtain water rights from the OWRB. Water providers purchasing water from other suppliers or sources are not required to obtain water rights as long as the furnishing entity has the appropriate water right or other source of authority. Each public water provider’s current water right(s) and source of supply have been summarized in this report. The percentage of each provider’s total 2007 water rights from surface water, alluvial groundwater, and bedrock groundwater supplies was also calculated, indicating the relative proportions of sources available to each provider.
A comparison of existing water rights to projected demands can show when additional water rights or other sources and in what amounts might be needed. Forecasts of conditions for the year 2060 indicate where additional water rights may be needed to satisfy demands by that time. However, in most cases, wholesale water transfers to other providers must also be addressed by the selling provider’s water rights. Thus, the amount of water rights required will exceed the retail demand for a selling provider and will be less than the retail demand for a purchasing provider.
In preparing to meet long-term needs, public water providers should consider strategic factors appropriate to their sources of water. For example, public water providers who use surface water can seek and obtain a “schedule of use” as part of their stream water right, which addresses projected growth and consequent increases in stream water use. Such schedules of use can be employed to address increases that are anticipated to occur over many years or even decades, as an alternative to the usual requirement to use the full authorized amount of stream water in a seven-year period. On the other hand, public water providers that utilize groundwater should consider the prospect that it may be necessary to purchase or lease additional land in order to increase their groundwater rights.
Public Water Provider Water Rights and Withdrawals (2010)
Panhandle Region
Provider
SDWIS ID1
County
Permitted Quantity
Source
Permitted Surface Water
Permitted Alluvial Groundwater
Permitted Bedrock Groundwater
(AFY)
Percent
BEAVER
OK2000404
Beaver
1,125
0%
0%
100%
BEAVER CO RWD #1 TURPIN
OK2000402
Beaver
218
0%
0%
100%
BEAVER CO RWD #2 (GATE)
OK2000405
Beaver
18
0%
100%
0%
BOISE CITY PWA
OK2001303
Cimarron
2,672
0%
0%
100%
BUFFALO
OK2003003
Harper
964
0%
0%
100%
DEWEY CO RWD #3
OK2007707
Woodward
743
0%
9%
91%
FARGO
OK2002303
Ellis
221
0%
0%
100%
FORGAN
OK2000406
Beaver
1,158
0%
0%
100%
FORT SUPPLY PWA
OK3007701
Woodward
17
---
100%
---
FREEDOM
OK3007601
Woods
2
---
100%
---
GAGE
OK2002301
Ellis
1,475
0%
80%
20%
GOODWELL
OK2007005
Texas
721
0%
0%
100%
GUYMON
OK2007003
Texas
12,385
0%
1%
99%
HARDESTY UTILITIES
OK2007004
Texas
278
0%
0%
100%
HARPER CO WATER CORP
OK2003001
Harper
1,200
0%
97%
3%
HOOKER
OK2007006
Texas
884
0%
0%
100%
KEYES UTILITY AUTH
OK2001302
Cimarron
697
0%
0%
100%
LAVERNE
OK2003002
Harper
1,972
0%
100%
0%
MOORELAND
OK2007709
Woodward
1,358
0%
100%
0%
OPTIMA
OK2007001
Texas
280
0%
0%
100%
QUINLAN COMMUNITY RWD #1
OK2007708
Woodward
91
---
100%
---
SEILING
OK2002205
Dewey
383
0%
100%
0%
SHARON UTILITIES
OK2007741
Woodward
40
0%
0%
100%
SHATTUCK
OK2002304
Ellis
1,931
0%
95%
5%
TEXAS COUNTY RWD #1
OK2007010
Texas
20
0%
0%
100%
TEXHOMA
OK2007009
Texas
1,068
0%
0%
100%
TYRONE
OK2007013
Texas
595
0%
0%
100%
WAYNOKA
OK2007604
Woods
1,280
0%
100%
0%
WOODS CO RWD #2
OK3007603
Woods
---
---
---
---
WOODWARD
OK2007701
Woodward
24,045
0%
30%
70%
WOODWARD CO RWD #1
OK2007706
Woodward
1122
0%
100%
0%
WOODWARD CO RWD #2
OK2007710
Woodward
278
0%
0%
100%
1 SDWIS - Safe Drinking Water Information SystemPanhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 27
Provider Supply Plans
In 2008, a survey was sent to 785 municipal and rural water providers throughout Oklahoma to collect vital background water supply and system information. Additional detail for each of these providers was solicited in 2010 as part of follow-up interviews conducted by the ODEQ. The 2010 interviews sought to confirm key details of the earlier survey and document additional details regarding each provider’s water supply infrastructure and plans. This included information on existing sources of supply (including surface water, groundwater, and other providers), short-term supply and infrastructure plans, and long-term supply and infrastructure plans.
In instances where no new source was identified, maintenance of the current source of supply is expected into the future. Providers may or may not have secured the necessary funding to implement their stated plans concerning infrastructure needs, commonly including additional wells or raw water conveyance, storage, and replacement/upgrade of treatment and distribution systems.
Additional support for individual water providers wishing to pursue enhanced planning efforts is documented in the Public Water Supply Planning Guide. This guide details how information contained in the OCWP Watershed Planning Region Reports and related planning documents can be used to formulate provider-level plans to meet present and future needs of individual water systems.
Town of Beaver (Beaver County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: add distribution system lines.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional well.
Beaver County RWD 1
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Beaver County RWD 2
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional well.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Boise City PWA (Cimarron County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
New water supply sources: drill new wells.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Town of Buffalo (Harper County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
Construct new water lines.
Dewey County RWD 3 (Woodward County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Town of Vici.
Long-Term Needs
Drill additional wells, includes land acquisition.
Town of Fargo (Ellis County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: improve existing wells.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional wells.
Town of Forgan (Beaver County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Fort Supply PWA (Woodward County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary sources: Woodward groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Town of Freedom (Woods County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Woodward County RWD 1
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Town of Gage (Ellis County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Ogallala, Wolf Creek Alluvial Aquifer
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional well.
Infrastructure improvements: relocate cast iron water mains.
Town of Goodwell (Texas County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
New supply source: water reuse.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional well.
City of Guymon (Texas County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Ogallala Aquifer
Short-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional well.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: replace water lines and meters; construct additional storage; rehabilitate water tower and pump station.
Hardesty Utilities (Texas County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Emergency source: Groundwater (impacted by MtBE)
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Construct new water line.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Harper County Water Corp.
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Buffalo groundwater.
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Town of Hooker (Texas County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Ogallala Aquifer
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional well(s).
Keyes Utility Auth. (Cimarron County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: construct new storage tank.
Long-Term Needs
New supply source: drill additional wells.
Infrastructure improvements: replace water lines.
Town of Laverne (Harper County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Beaver River Aquifer
Short-Term Needs
None required.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: possibly replace water mains and upgrade storage.
Town of Mooreland (Woodward County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary sources: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None required.
Long-Term Needs
None required.
Town of Optima (Texas County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None required.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Construct one additional well.
OCWP Water Provider Survey (1 of 2)
Panhandle Region28 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
OCWP Water Provider Survey (2 of 2)
Panhandle Region
Quinlan Community RWD 1 (Woodward County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: N. Canadian Alluvial and Terrace Aquifer
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
New water supply sources: drill additional wells or purchase from nearby system. Infrastructure improvements: expand transmission and treatment capacity.
City of Seiling (Dewey County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None required.
Long-Term Needs
None required.
Sharon Utilities (Woodward County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None required.
Long-Term Needs
None required.
Town of Shattuck (Ellis County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Oscar B Aquifer
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Expand existing well system and storage.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Expand existing well system and storage.
Texas County RWD 1
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Distribution system may need replacement.
Town of Texhoma (Texas County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
None identified.
Long-Term Needs
None identified.
Town of Tyrone (Texas County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: possibly drill one additional well.
Long-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Replace distribution lines and refurbish water tower.
City of Waynoka (Woods County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Replace reverse osmosis units
Long-Term Needs
New water supply sources: Drill new wells.
Woods County RWD 2
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Coldwater, Kansas
Short-Term Needs
None required.
Long-Term Needs
None required.
City of Woodward (Woodward County)
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Expand existing well field.
Long-Term Needs
New water supply sources: Expand existing well field.
Woodward County RWD 1
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Drill one additional well.
Long-Term Needs
None required.
Woodward County RWD 2
Current Source of Supply
Primary source: Groundwater
Short-Term Needs
Infrastructure improvements: Drill one additional well.
Long-Term Needs
None required. Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 29
Drinking Water Infrastructure Cost Summary
As part of the public water provider analysis, regional cost estimates to meet system drinking water infrastructure needs over the next 50 years were prepared. While it is difficult to account for changes that may occur within this extended time frame, it is beneficial to evaluate, at least on the order-of-magnitude level, the long-range costs of providing potable water.
Project cost estimates were developed for a selection of existing water providers, and then weighted to determine total regional costs. The OCWP method is similar to that utilized by the EPA to determine national drinking water infrastructure costs in 2007. However, the OCWP uses a 50-year planning horizon while the EPA uses a 20-year period. Also, the OCWP includes a broader spectrum of project types rather than limiting projects to those eligible for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund program. While costs for new reservoirs specific to providers are not included, this study evaluated whether there was an overall need in the region for new surface water supplies. When rehabilitation of existing reservoirs or new reservoir projects were necessary, these costs were applied at the regional level.
More information on the methodology and cost estimates is available in the supplemental report, Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Assessment by Region.
Infrastructure Cost Summary
Panhandle Region
Provider System Category1
Infrastructure Need (millions of 2007 dollars)
Present - 2020
2021 - 2040
2041 - 2060
Total Period
Small
$288
$291
$129
$708
Medium
$48
$68
$68
$184
Large
$0
$0
$0
$0
Reservoir2
$0
$0
$38
$38
Total
$336
$359
$235
$930
1 Large providers are defined as those serving more than 100,000 people, medium systems as those serving between 3,301 and 100,000 people, and small systems as those serving 3,300 or fewer people.
2 The “reservoir” category refers specifically to rehabilitation projects.
Approximately $930 million is needed to meet the projected drinking water infrastructure • needs of the Panhandle region over the next 50 years. The infrastructure costs are expected to occur at a relatively constant rate over time.
Distribution and transmission projects account for more than 85% of the providers’ • estimated infrastructure costs, followed distantly by water treatment and source water projects.
Small providers, which include nearly all providers in the Panhandle Region, have the • largest overall drinking water infrastructure costs.
Projects involving rehabilitation of existing reservoirs comprise approximately 4% of the • total costs. These costs are expected to be incurred after 2040.30 Panhandle Regional Report, Basin Data & Analysis
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Supply Options
Limitations Analysis
For each of the state’s 82 OCWP basins, an analysis of water supply and demand was followed by an analysis of limitations for surface water, bedrock groundwater, and alluvial groundwater use. For surface water, the most pertinent limiting characteristics considered were (1) physical availability of water, (2) permit availability, and (3) water quality. For alluvial and bedrock groundwater, permit availability was not a limiting factor through 2060, and existing data were insufficient to conduct meaningful groundwater quality analyses. Therefore, limitations for major alluvial and bedrock aquifers were related to physical availability of water and included an analysis of both the amount of any forecasted depletion relative to the amount of water in storage and rate at which the depletion was predicted to occur.
Methodologies were developed to assess limitations and assign appropriate scores for each supply source in each basin. For surface water, scores were calculated weighting the characteristics as follows: 50% for physical availability, 30% for permit availability, and 20% for water quality. For alluvial and bedrock groundwater scores, the magnitude of depletion relative to amount of water in storage and rate of depletion were each weighted 50%.
The resulting supply limitation scores were used to rank all 82 basins for surface water, major alluvial groundwater, and major bedrock groundwater sources (see Water Supply Limitations map on page 5). For each source, basins ranking the highest were considered to be “significantly limited” in the ability of that source to meet forecasted demands reliably. Basins with intermediate rankings were considered to be “potentially limited” for that source, and basins with the lowest rankings were considered to be “minimally limited” for that source and not projected to have any gaps or depletions. For bedrock and alluvial groundwater rankings, “potentially limited” was the baseline default given to basins lacking major aquifers due to typically lower yields and insufficient data.
Based on an analysis of all three sources of water, the basins with the most advanced limitations—the most severe water supply challenges—were identified as “Hot Spots.” A discussion of the methodologies used in identifying Hot Spots, results, and recommendations can be found in the OCWP Executive Report.
Primary Options
To provide a range of potential solutions for mitigation of water supply shortages in each of the 82 OCWP basins, five primary options were evaluated for potential effectiveness: (1) demand management, (2) use of out-of-basin supplies, (3) reservoir use, (4) increasing reliance on surface water, and (5) increasing reliance on groundwater. For each basin, the potential effectiveness of each primary option was assigned one of three ratings: (1) typically effective, (2) potentially effective, and (3) likely ineffective (see Water Supply Option Effectiveness map on page 6). No options were necessary in basins where no gaps or depletions were anticipated.
Demand Management
“Demand management” refers to the potential to reduce water demands and alleviate gaps or depletions by implementing drought management or conservation measures. Demand management is a vitally important tool that can be implemented either temporarily or permanently to decrease demand and increase available supply. “Drought management” refers to short-term measures, such as temporary restrictions on outdoor watering, while “conservation measures” refers to long-term activities that result in consistent water savings throughout the year. Municipal and industrial conservation techniques can include modifying customer behaviors, using more efficient plumbing fixtures, or eliminating water leaks. Agricultural conservation techniques can include reducing water demand through more efficient irrigation systems and production of crops with decreased water requirements.
Two specific scenarios for conservation were analyzed for the OCWP—moderate and substantial—to assess the relative effectiveness in reducing statewide water demand in the two largest demand sectors, Municipal/Industrial and Crop Irrigation. For the Watershed Planning Region reports, only moderately expanded conservation activities were considered when assessing the overall effectiveness of Demand Management for each basin. A broader analysis of moderate and substantial conservation measures statewide is discussed below and summarized in the “Expanded Options” section of the OCWP Executive Report.
Demand management was considered to be “typically effective” in basins where it would likely eliminate both gaps and storage depletions and “potentially effective” in basins where it would likely either reduce gaps and depletions or eliminate either gaps or depletions (but not both). There were no basins where demand management could not reduce gaps and/or storage depletions to at least some extent; therefore this option was not rated “likely ineffective” for any basin.
Out-of-Basin Supplies
Use of “out-of-basin supplies” refers to the option of transferring water through pipelines from a source in one basin to another basin. This option was considered a “potentially effective” solution in all basins due to its general potential in eliminating gaps and depletions. The option was not rated “typically effective” because complexity and cost make it only practical as a long-term solution. The effectiveness of this option for a basin was also assessed with the consideration of potential new reservoir sites within the respective region as identified in the Expanded Options section below and the OCWP Reservoir Viability Study report.
Reservoir Use
“Reservoir Use” refers to the development of additional in-basin reservoir storage. Reservoir storage can be provided through increased use of existing facilities, such as reallocation of existing purposes at major federal reservoir sites or rehabilitation of smaller NRCS projects to include municipal and/or industrial water supply, or the construction of new reservoirs.
The effectiveness rating of reservoir use for a basin was based on a hypothetical reservoir located at the furthest downstream basin outlet. Water transmission and legal or water quality constraints were not considered; however, potential constraints in permit availability were noted. A site located further upstream could potentially provide adequate yield to meet demand, but would likely require greater storage than a site located at the basin outlet. The effectiveness rating was also largely contingent upon the existence of previously studied reservoir sites (see the Expanded Options section below) and/or the ability of new streamflow diversions with storage to meet basin water demands.
Reservoir use was considered “typically effective” in basins containing one or more potentially viable reservoir site(s) unless the basin was fully allocated for surface water and had no permit availability. For basins with no permit availability, reservoir use was considered “potentially effective,” since diversions would be limited to existing permits. Reservoir use was also considered “potentially effective” in basins that generate Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 31
sufficient reservoir yield to meet future demand. Statewide, the reservoir use option was considered “likely ineffective” in only three basins (Basins 18, 55, and 66), where it was determined that insufficient streamflow would be available to provide an adequate reservoir yield to meet basin demand.
Increasing Reliance on
Surface Water
“Increasing reliance on surface water” refers to changing the surface water-groundwater use ratio to meet future demands by increasing surface water use. For baseline analysis, the proportion of future demand supplied by surface water and groundwater for each sector is assumed equal to current proportions. Increasing the use of surface water through direct diversions, without reservoir storage or releases upstream from storage provides a reliable supply option in limited areas of the state and has potential to mitigate bedrock groundwater depletions and/or alluvial groundwater depletions. However, this largely depends upon local conditions concerning the specific location, amount, and timing of the diversion.
Due to this uncertainty, the pronounced periods of low streamflow in many river systems across the state, and the potential to create or augment surface water gaps, this option was considered “typically ineffective” for all basins. The preferred alternative statewide is reservoir use, which provides the most reliable surface water supply source.
Increasing Reliance on
Groundwater
“Increasing reliance on groundwater” refers to changing the surface water-groundwater use ratio to meet future demands by increasing groundwater use. Supplies from major aquifers are particularly reliable because they generally exhibit higher well yields and contain large amounts of water in storage. Minor aquifers can also contain large amounts of water in storage, but well yields are typically lower and may be insufficient to meet the needs of high volume water users. Site-specific information on the suitability of minor aquifers for supply should be considered prior to large-scale use. Additional groundwater supplies may also be developed through artificial recharge (groundwater storage and recovery), which is summarized in the “Expanded Options” section of the OWRB Executive Report.
Increased reliance on groundwater supplies was considered “typically effective” in basins where both gaps and depletions could be mitigated in a measured fashion that did not lead to additional groundwater depletions. This option was considered “potentially effective” in basins where surface water gaps could be mitigated by increased groundwater use, but would likely result in increased depletions in either alluvial or bedrock groundwater storage. Increased reliance on groundwater supplies was considered “typically ineffective” in basins where there were no major aquifers.
Expanded Options
In addition to the standard analysis of primary options for each basin, specific OCWP studies were conducted statewide on several more advanced though less conventional options that have potential to reduce basin gaps and depletions. More detailed summaries of these options are available in the OWRB Executive Report. Full reports are available on the OWRB website.
Expanded Conservation Measures
Water conservation was considered an essential component of the “demand management” option in basin-level analysis of options for reducing or eliminating gaps and storage depletions. At the basin level, moderately expanded conservation measures were used as the basis for analyzing effectiveness. In a broader OCWP study, summarized in the OCWP Executive Report and documented in the report Water Demand Forecast Report Addendum: Conservation and Climate Change, both moderately and substantially expanded conservation activities were analyzed at a statewide level for the state’s two largest demand sectors: Municipal/ Industrial (M&I) and Crop Irrigation. For each sector, two scenarios were analyzed: (1) moderately expanded conservation activities, and (2) substantially expanded conservation activities. Water savings for the municipal and industrial and crop irrigation water use sectors were assessed, and for the M&I sector, a cost-benefit analysis was performed to quantify savings associated with reduced costs in drinking water production and decreased wastewater treatment. The energy savings and associated water savings realized as a result of these decreases were also quantified.
Artificial Aquifer Recharge
In 2008, the Oklahoma Legislature passed Senate Bill 1410 requiring the OWRB to develop and implement criteria to prioritize potential locations throughout the state where artificial recharge demonstration projects are most feasible to meet future water supply challenges. A workgroup of numerous water agencies and user groups was organized to identify suitable locations in both alluvial and bedrock aquifers. Fatal flaw and threshold screening analyses resulted in identification of six alluvial sites and nine bedrock sites. These sites were subjected to further analysis that resulted in three sites deemed by the workgroup as having the best potential for artificial recharge demonstration projects.
Where applicable, potential recharge sites are noted in the “Increasing Reliance on Groundwater” option discussion in basin data and analysis sections of the Watershed Planning Region Reports. The site selection methodology and results for the five selected sites are summarized in the OCWP Executive Report; more detailed information on the workgroup and study is presented in the OCWP report Artificial Aquifer Recharge Issues and Recommendations.
Marginal Quality Water Sources
In 2008, the Oklahoma Legislature passed Senate Bill 1627 requiring the OWRB to establish a technical workgroup to analyze the expanded use of marginal quality water (MQW) from various sources throughout the state. The group included representatives from state and federal agencies, industry, and other stakeholders. Through facilitated discussions, the group defined MQW as that which has been historically unusable due to technological or economic issues associated with diverting, treating, and/or conveying the water. Five categories of MQW were identified for further characterization and technical analysis: (1) treated wastewater effluent, (2) stormwater runoff, (3) oil and gas flowback/produced water, (4) brackish surface and groundwater, and (5) water with elevated levels of key constituents, such as nitrates, that would require advanced treatment prior to beneficial use.
A phased approach was utilized to meet the study’s objectives, which included quantifying and characterizing MQW sources and their locations for use through 2060, assessing constraints to MQW use, and matching identified sources of MQW with projected water shortages across the state along with a determination of feasibility. Of all the general MQW uses evaluated, water reuse—beneficially using treated wastewater to meet certain demand—is perhaps the most commonly applied elsewhere in the U.S. Similarly, wastewater was determined to be one of the most viable sources of marginal quality water for short-term use in Oklahoma. Results of the workgroup’s study are summarized in the OCWP Executive Report; more detailed information on the workgroup and study is presented in the OCWP report Marginal Quality Water Issues and Recommendations.
Potential Reservoir Development
Oklahoma is the location of many reservoirs that provide a dependable, vital water supply source for numerous purposes. While economic, environmental, cultural, and geographical constraints generally limit the construction of new reservoirs, significant interest persists due to their potential in meeting various future needs, particularly those associated with municipalities and feasible regional public supply systems.32 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
As another option to address Oklahoma’s long-range water needs, the OCWP reservoir viability study was initiated to identify potential reservoir sites throughout the state that have been analyzed to various degrees by the OWRB, Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and other public or private agencies. Principal elements of the study included extensive literature search; identification of criteria to determine a reservoir’s viability; creation of a database to store essential information for each site; evaluation of sites; Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping of the most viable sites; aerial photograph and map reconnaissance; screening of environmental, cultural, and endangered species issues; estimates of updated construction costs; and categorical assessment of viability. The study revealed more than 100 sites statewide. Each was assigned a ranking, ranging from Category 4 (sites with at least adequate information that are viable candidates for future development) to Category 0 (sites that exist only on a historical map and for which no study data can be verified).
This analysis does not necessarily indicate an actual need or specific recommendation to build any potential project. Rather, these sites are presented to provide local and regional decision-makers with additional tools as they anticipate future water supply needs and opportunities. Study results present only a cursory examination of the many factors associated with project feasibility or implementation. Detailed investigations would be required in all cases to verify feasibility of construction and implementation. A summary of potential reservoir sites statewide is available in the OCWP Executive Report; more detailed information on the workgroup and study is presented in the OCWP Reservoir Viability Study report.
Reservoir Project Viability Categorization
Category 4: Sites with at least adequate information that are viable candidates for future development.
Category 3: Sites with sufficient data for analysis, but less than desirable for current viability.
Category 2: Sites that may contain fatal flaws or other factors that could severely impede potential development.
Category 1: Sites with limited available data and lacking essential elements of information.
Category 0: Typically sites that exist only on an historical map. Study data cannot be located or verified.
Potential Reservoir Sites (Categories 3 & 4)
Panhandle Region
Name
Category
Stream
Basin
Purposes1
Total Storage
Conservation Pool
Primary Study
Updated Cost Estimate2
(2010 dollars)
Surface Area
Storage
Dependable Yield
Date
Agency
AF
Acres
AF
AF/Y
Englewood
4
Cimarron River
65
IR, FC, F&W, R
424,400
7,400
63,500
36,967
1947
Bureau of Reclamation
$431,898,000
Forgan
3
Cimarron River
65
WS, F&W, R
129,000
3,668
77,500
24,100
1991
Bureau of Reclamation
$225,777,000
1 WS = Water Supply, FC = Flood Control, IR = Irrigation, HP = Hydroelectric Power, WQ = Water Quality, C = Conservation, R = Recreation, FW= Fish & Wildlife, CW = Cooling Water, N = Navigation, LF = Low Flow Regulation
2 The majority of cost estimates were updated using estimated costs from previous project reports combined with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Construction Cost Index System (CWCCIS) annual escalation figures to scale the original cost estimates to present-day cost estimates. These estimated costs may not accurately reflect current conditions at the proposed project site and are meant to be used for general comparative purposes only.Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 33
Expanded Water Supply Options
Panhandle Region35
BASIN 52
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Data & Analysis
Panhandle Watershed Planning Region
Basin 5236 Panhandle Regional Report Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Basin 52 Summary
Basin 52 accounts for about 3% of the current water demand in the Panhandle Watershed Planning Region. About 72% of the demand is from the Crop Irrigation demand sector. The second largest demand sector is Municipal and Industrial at 10%, which includes a number of small municipal providers and rural water districts. Surface water satisfies only about 3% of the total demand in the basin. Groundwater satisfies about 97% of the demand (67% alluvial and 30% bedrock). The peak summer month demand in Basin 52 is about 8 times the winter demand, which is more pronounced than the overall statewide pattern.
The entire water supply yield of Canton Lake, which is located at the basin outlet, is fully allocated to Oklahoma City (Basin 50) and is not expected to provide additional supplies in Basin 52. Historically, the North Canadian River at Canton has undergone frequent periods of very low flows in each month of the year. Relative to other basins in the state, surface water quality in Basin 52 is considered good. However, Bent Creek, a tributary to the North Canadian River, is impaired for Agricultural use due to high levels of sulfate. The North Canadian stream system is currently fully allocated and has no permit availability.
The majority of current groundwater rights are in the Ogallala and North Canadian River aquifers. Each of these aquifers has approximately 1.8 million acre-feet of water stored within the basin. There are no significant basin-wide groundwater quality issues. Localized areas with high levels of nitrate have been found in the overall boundaries of the Ogallala and North Canadian River aquifers and may occur in Basin 52. The use of groundwater to meet in-basin demand is not expected to be limited by the availability of permits through 2060.
The projected 2060 water demand of 14,290 AFY in Basin 52 reflects a 1,280 AFY increase (10%) over 2010 demand. The Crop Irrigation demand sector will
Synopsis
Most water users are expected to continue to rely primarily on the basin’s alluvial and • bedrock aquifers.
By 2020, alluvial and bedrock groundwater use is expected to exceed recharge rates • and thus draw from aquifer storage.
There is a high probability that periodic surface water gaps will occur by 2050.•
To reduce the risk of adverse impacts on water supplies, it is recommended that • storage depletions and gaps be decreased where economically feasible.
Additional conservation or new small reservoirs could reduce the adverse effects of • localized groundwater storage depletions.
Alternatives to direct surface water diversions, such as groundwater supplies and/or • developing new small reservoirs, could eliminate gaps.
BASIN 52
Current Demand by Source and Sector
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Total Demand
13,010 AFY
Water Resources
Panhandle Region, Basin 52Panhandle Regional Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Report 37
be the largest demand sector in the basin; however minimal growth is expected. The largest growth in demand will occur from two currently minor demand sectors: Oil and Gas and Thermoelectric Power.
Gaps & Depletions
Based on projected demand and historical hydrology, groundwater storage depletions are expected to occur as early as 2020, and surface water gaps are expected by 2050. By 2060, surface water gaps have a 76% probability of occurring in at least one month during the year and will total as much as 70 AFY. Alluvial storage depletions will occur in almost every year in amounts up to 880 AFY. By 2060, bedrock storage depletions are expected to increase to 170 AFY. Alluvial and bedrock groundwater storage depletions are minimal compared to the total groundwater storage in the basin and should not constrain use over the planning horizon. However, localized storage depletions may adversely impact well yields, water quality, and/or pumping costs.
Options
Most water users are expected to continue to rely heavily on groundwater supplies. To reduce the risk of adverse impacts on water supplies, it is recommended that storage depletions and gaps be decreased where economically feasible.
Moderately expanded permanent conservation activities in the Municipal and Industrial and Crop Irrigation sectors could reduce gaps and storage depletions. The basin should focus on permanent conservation activities, instead of temporary drought management activities, since gaps and storage depletions will occur in almost every year.
Out-of-basin supplies may be developed to supplement the basin’s water supplies and reduce or eliminate gaps and storage depletions. The OCWP Reservoir Viability Study, which evaluated the potential for reservoirs throughout the state, identified two potentially viable out-of-basin sites in the Panhandle Watershed Planning Region. However, out-of-basin supplies may not be cost-effective for all users based on the availability of groundwater resources and distance to reliable surface water supplies.
New reservoir storage could potentially mitigate surface water gaps in the basin. However, as the stream system is currently fully allocated, substantial permit issues would have to be resolved in order to construct new reservoir storage, and any new reservoirs could not impact Canton Lake’s yield.
Increased reliance on surface water through direct diversions, without reservoir storage, would increase gaps and is not recommended on a basin scale. Also, there is no additional surface water permit availability in the basin.
Increased reliance on groundwater supplies could mitigate surface water gaps, but would increase the amount of groundwater storage depletions. Any increases in storage depletions would be minimal relative to the volume of water in aquifer storage in the basin.
BASIN 52
Water Supply Option Effectiveness
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Demand Management
Out-of-Basin Supplies
Reservoir Use
Increasing Supply from Surface Water
Increasing Supply from Groundwater
nTypically EffectivenPotentially EffectivenLikely IneffectivenNo Option Necessary
Water Supply Limitations
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Surface Water
Alluvial Groundwater
Bedrock Groundwater
nMinimalnPotentialnSignificant
Median Historical Streamflow
at the Basin Outlet
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Projected Water Demand
Panhandle Region, Basin 5238 Panhandle Regional Report, Basin Data & Analysis Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Basin 52 Data & Analysis
Historical Precipitation
Regional Climate Division
Surface Water Resources
Basin 52 receives greater precipitation than • other basins in the Panhandle Region due to its eastward extent. However, the majority of the streamflow in the North Canadian River at Canton has historically been generated in upstream basins. Historical streamflow from 1950 through 2007 was used to estimate the range of future surface water supplies. The North Canadian River at Canton had prolonged periods of below-average streamflow from the early 1960s to the mid 1980s. From the mid 1990s to the early 2000s, the basin went through a prolonged period of above-average flow and precipitation, demonstrating the hydrologic variability in the basin.
The range of historical streamflow at the basin • outlet is shown by the average, median, and minimum streamflow over a 58-year period of record. The portion of the North Canadian River in Basin 52 is considered perennial (flows throughout the year). The median monthly streamflow is greater than 750 AF/month in all months and greater than 2,000 AF/month in the spring and summer. However, the river can experience prolonged periods of low flow in any month of the year. Relative to other basins in the state, the surface water quality in Basin 52 is considered good.
Streamflow at the basin outlet is regulated by • Canton Lake. Canton Lake provides 16,200 AFY of dependable yield to Oklahoma City, but is not expected to provide future supplies for Basin 52.
BASIN 52
Monthly Historical Streamflow at the Basin Outlet
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Historical Streamflow at the Basin Outlet
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
nPrimarily Measured Flows
nMeasured/Synthesized Flows
nSignificant Synthesized Flows
Streamflow Data Source
Panhandle Region, Basin 52Panhandle Regional Report, Basin Data & Analysis 39
Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
BASIN 52
Groundwater Resources
The majority of water rights in the basin • are from the North Canadian River Ogallala aquifers. The North Canadian River aquifer is located along the northern border of the basin and has approximately 1.8 million acre-feet of in-basin storage. The Ogallala aquifer is located in the southwestern portion of the basin and has approximately 1.9 million acre-feet of in-basin storage. Estimated Ogallala aquifer recharge in the basin is 3,000 AFY. There are substantial water rights from non-delineated bedrock aquifers in roughly the central and southeastern portions of the basin.
There are no significant groundwater • quality issues in Basin 52.
Groundwater Resources - Aquifer Summary (2010)
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Aquifer
Portion of Basin Overlaying Aquifer
Current Groundwater Rights
Aquifer Storage in Basin
Equal Proportionate Share
Groundwater Available for New Permits
Name
Type
Class1
Percent
AFY
AF
AFY/Acre
AFY
Canadian River
Alluvial
Major
1%
0
12,000
temporary 2.0
12,800
North Canadian River
Alluvial
Major
36%
40,000
1,778,000
1.0
165,700
Ogallala
Bedrock
Major
24%
9,900
1,881,000
1.4
268,500
Non-Delineated Groundwater Source
Bedrock
Minor
N/A
10,100
N/A
temporary 2.0
N/A
Non-Delineated Groundwater Source
Alluvial
Minor
N/A
0
N/A
temporary 2.0
N/A
1 Bedrock aquifers with typical yields greater than 50 gpm and alluvial aquifers with typical yields greater than 150 gpm are considered major.40 Panhandle Regional Report, Basin Data & Analysis Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Water Demand
Basin 52’s water demand is about • 3% of the Panhandle Region’s total demand and will increase by 10% (1,280 AFY) from 2010 to 2060. The Crop Irrigation demand sector will be the largest demand sector over the next 50 years; however minimal growth is expected. The majority of growth in demand will occur from two currently minor demand sectors: Oil and Gas and Thermoelectric Power.
Surface water is used to supply 3% of the • total demand in Basin 52 and its use will increase by 46% (180 AFY) from 2010 to 2060. Oil and Gas surface water use is expected to be as large as Crop Irrigation surface water use by 2060.
Alluvial groundwater is used to supply • 67% of the total demand in Basin 52 and will increase by 9% (790 AFY) from 2010 to 2060. The Thermoelectric Power demand sector will account for approximately 50% of the growth in alluvial groundwater use.
Bedrock groundwater is used to supply • 30% of the total demand in Basin 52 and will increase by 8% (310 AFY) from 2010 to 2060.
BASIN 52
Total Demand by Sector
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Planning Horizon
Crop Irrigation
Livestock
Municipal & Industrial
Oil & Gas
Self Supplied Industrial
Self Supplied Residential
Thermoelectric Power
Total
AFY
2010
9,310
1,220
1,340
170
0
440
530
13,010
2020
9,330
1,230
1,380
240
0
450
590
13,220
2030
9,350
1,240
1,420
330
0
470
660
13,470
2040
9,370
1,250
1,440
440
0
470
740
13,710
2050
9,380
1,260
1,470
560
0
480
820
13,970
2060
9,410
1,270
1,500
700
0
490
920
14,290
Surface Water Demand
by Sector
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Alluvial Groundwater Demand
by Sector
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Bedrock Groundwater Demand
by Sector
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
nThermoelectric Power nSelf Supplied Residential nSelf Supplied Industrial nOil & Gas nMunicipal & Industrial nLivestock nCrop IrrigationOklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan Panhandle Regional Report, Basin Data & Analysis 41
BASIN 52
Current Monthly Demand Distribution by Sector
The Municipal and Industrial and Self • Supplied Residential demand sectors use 50% more water in summer months than in winter months. Crop Irrigation has a high demand in summer months and little or no demand in winter months. The Livestock and Oil and Gas demand sectors have more consistent demand throughout the year. Thermoelectric Power water use peaks in August and is near zero in November.
Current Monthly Demand Distribution by Source
The peak summer month total water • demand in Basin 52 is about 10 times the monthly winter demand, which is more pronounced than the overall statewide pattern. The peak summer month surface water demand is about 6 times the monthly winter demand. The peak summer month alluvial and bedrock groundwater demand is about 11 times the monthly winter demand.
Monthly Demand Distribution by Sector (2010)
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Monthly Demand Distribution by Source (2010)
Panhandle Region, Basin 5242 Panhandle Regional Report, Basin Data & Analysis Oklahoma Comprehensive Water Plan
Gaps and Storage Depletions
Based on projected demand and historical hydrology, • groundwater storage depletions are projected to occur by 2020 and surface water gaps by 2050.
Surface water gaps in Basin 52 may occur throughout the • year. Surface water gaps in 2060 will be up to 11% (10 AF/month) of the surface water demand in the peak summer month, and as much as 33% (10 AF/month) of the peak winter month’s surface water demand. By 2060, there will be a 76% probability of gaps occurring in at least one month of the year. Surface water gaps are most likely to occur during winter months.
Alluvial groundwater storage depletions in Basin 52 may • occur throughout the year, peaking in size during the summer. Alluvial groundwater storage depletions in 2060 will be up to 7% (160 AF/month) of the alluvial groundwater demand in the peak summer month. Storage depletions are smaller in size during the winter, but will be as much as 30% (90 AF/month) of the peak winter months’ alluvial groundwater demand. By 2060, there will be a 93% probability of storage depletions occurring in at least one month of the year. Alluvial groundwater storage depletions are least likely to occur in spring months.
Bedrock groundwater storage depletions in Basin 52 • may occur during the spring, summer, and fall. Bedrock groundwater storage depletions in 2060 will be 5% (30 AF/month) of the bedrock groundwater demand on average in the peak summer month’s, and 9% (30 AF/month) on average of the peak spring month’s bedrock groundwater demand.
Projected groundwater storage depletions are minimal relative • to the amount of water in storage in the aquifers. However, localized storage depletions may adversely impact water well yields, water quality, and/or pumping costs.
BASIN 52
Magnitude and Probability of Annual
Gaps and Storage Depletions
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Planning Horizon
Maximum Gaps/Storage Depletions
Probability of Gaps/Storage Depletions
Surface Water
Alluvial Groundwater
Bedrock Groundwater
Surface Water
Alluvial Groundwater
AFY
Percent
2020
0
130
40
0%
93%
2030
0
320
60
0%
93%
2040
0
500
100
0%
93%
2050
30
680
140
57%
93%
2060
70
880
170
76%
93%
Alluvial Groundwater Storage Depletions by Season (2060 Demands)
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Months (Season)
Maximum Storage Depletion1
Median Storage Depletion
Probability
AF/month
AF/month
Percent
Dec-Feb (Winter)
90
50
66%
Mar-May (Spring)
70
50
48%
Jun-Aug (Summer)
160
100
62%
Sep-Nov (Fall)
80
70
59%
1 Amount shown represents largest amount for any one month in season indicated.
Surface Water Gaps by Season
(2060 Demands)
Panhandle Region, Basin 52
Months (Season)
Maximum Gap 1
Median Gap
Probability